Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Hebashy v SGS Australia Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 28 File number(s): QUD 482 of 2022
Judgment of: SARAH C DERRINGTON J
Date of judgment: 30 January 2024
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for summary dismissal of the proceedings – whether the pleadings are vague, ambiguous and do not disclose a cause of action – insufficient and deficient pleadings – insufficient and deficient amended pleadings – no reasonable prospect of success – application for summary dismissal granted EMPLOYMENT AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS – allegation of contraventions of ss 97, 340, 344, 345 and 355 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – failure to establish contravention of the Act – failure to satisfy conditions for costs order under s 570 of the Act
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss 97, 340, 341, 342, 344, 345, 355, 361, 570 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 31A Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 16.02, 26.01
Cases cited: Altintas v O'Dea Lawyers (No 2) [2018] FCAFC 187 Chandrasekaran v Commonwealth of Australia (No 3) [2020] FCA 1629 Council of Kangan Batman Institute of Technology and Further Education v Australian Industrial Relations Commission [2006] FCAFC 199; 156 FCR 275 Esso Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Workers' Union [2016] FCAFC 72; 245 FCR 39 Kanan v Australian Postal and Telecommunications Union (1992) 43 IR 257 Leach v Burston [2022] FCA 87 Monash Health v Singh [2023] FCAFC 166 Ryan v Primesafe [2015] FCA 8; 323 ALR 107 Spencer v Commonwealth [2010] HCA 28; 241 CLR 118
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate