Alex v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd; Alex v Whittaker; Alex v Goodsir; Alex v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd; Alex v The Age Company Ltd; Alex v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No. 2)

In the Federal Circuit Court, Alex brought defamation proceedings against Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd, Whittaker, Goodsir, The Age Company Ltd, and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. The dispute involved six separate actions, all of which were delayed repeatedly due to the plaintiff's failure to comply with the court's timetables. Despite the trials being rescheduled for 2017, the plaintiff continued to cause delays. Due to the plaintiff's bankruptcy, no costs sanction could be imposed. The plaintiff failed to appear in court to oppose the application for dismissal, raising questions about whether the court should proceed in the self-represented plaintiff's absence and whether the advanced stage of the trials should be considered a factor.

The court had to determine if it should proceed with the dismissal of the proceedings in the absence of the plaintiff and if the advanced stage of the trials was relevant to the decision. The plaintiff had been given multiple opportunities to comply with the court's orders and had repeatedly failed to do so. The court also considered the significant delays that had already occurred and the potential for further delays if the proceedings were not dismissed. The court concluded that the plaintiff's repeated failures to comply with the court's timetables and the advanced stage of the trials justified the dismissal of the proceedings with costs.

The court dismissed the proceedings with costs, highlighting the plaintiff's failure to appear in court to oppose the application for dismissal. The plaintiff was given multiple opportunities to attend court but did not do so, despite being called multiple times. The court also noted that the plaintiff's bankruptcy prevented the imposition of a costs sanction. The dismissal was made with liberty to apply in relation to costs, and the hearing date of 6 March 2017 was vacated. The court's decision was based on the plaintiff's repeated failures to comply with the court's orders and the advanced stage of the trials, which justified the dismissal of the proceedings with costs.