Patial v Kailash Lawyers Pty Ltd trading as Kailash Lawyers and Consultants [2022] FCA 662

Federal Court of Australia

Patial v Kailash Lawyers Pty Ltd trading as Kailash Lawyers and Consultants [2022] FCA 662 File number(s): NSD 1016 of 2021

Judgment of: GOODMAN J

Date of judgment: 9 June 2022

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – re-litigation of central issue as whether the applicant was an employee of the respondent – abuse of process – Statement of Claim struck out and removed from Court file – leave to replead matters not dependent upon the already litigated central issue

Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)

Cases cited: Batterham v Clayton Utz Partnership [2022] FCA 360 Clarke v Nursing and Midwifery Council of New South Wales [2019] FCA 1782 Coffey v Secretary, Department of Social Security [1999] FCA 375; (1999) 86 FCR 434 Fortescue Metals Group v Warrie on behalf of the Yindjibarndi People [2019] FCAFC 177; (2019) 273 FCR 350 Kitoko v University of Technology Sydney [2021] FCA 360 McDonald v State of South Australia [2011] FCA 297; (2011) 126 ALD 488 PNJ v The Queen [2009] HCA 6; (2009) 83 ALJR 384 Prateek Patial v Kailash Lawyers Pty Ltd T/A Kailash Lawyers and Consultants [2021] FWC 4167 Prateek Patial v Kailash Lawyers Pty Ltd T/as Kailash Lawyers and Consultants [2021] FWCFB 6055 Quall v Northern Territory [2011] FCA 1441; (2011) 286 ALR 374 Rippon v Chilcotin Pty Ltd [2001] NSWCA 142; (2001) 53 NSWLR 198 Sea Culture International Pty Ltd v Scoles [1991] FCA 523; (1991) 32 FCR 275 Spalla v St George Motor Finance Ltd (ACN 007 656 555) (No 6) [2004] FCA 1699 State Bank of New South Wales Ltd v Stenhouse Ltd (1997) Aust Torts Reports 81-423 at 64,089 UBS AG v Tyne as Trustee of the Argo Trust [2018] HCA 45; (2018) 265 CLR 77 Walton v ACN 004 410 833 Limited (formerly Arrium Limited) (in liq) [2022] HCA 3; (2022) 96 ALJR 166 Williams v Spautz [1992] HCA 34; (1992) 174 CLR 509