Ellis v Rottnest Lodge (1989) Pty Ltd Trading As Rottnest Lodge (No 2)

This matter came before Judge Lucev in the District Court of Western Australia concerning an application by Mr Ellis for an extension of time to file an originating application. Mr Ellis alleged disability discrimination against Rottnest Lodge (1989) Pty Ltd, trading as Rottnest Lodge.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant Mr Ellis an extension of time to file his originating application. This required the Court to consider several factors, including whether Mr Ellis had provided a sufficient explanation for the delay in filing, whether Rottnest Lodge would suffer prejudice if an extension were granted, and whether Mr Ellis had an arguable case. The Court also had to determine what constitutes an arguable case in the context of an interlocutory application for an extension of time.

Judge Lucev noted that to justify an extension of time based on medical unfitness, Mr Ellis was required to provide evidence on oath properly explaining his medical condition and how it prevented him from filing on time. The Court observed that Mr Ellis had been given an opportunity to provide such evidence but had not done so. The Court referred to the decision in *Luck v Chief Executive Officer of Centrelink* [2015] FCAFC 75, which highlighted the importance of medical evidence being verified by affidavit and the need for it to demonstrate a recent development or exacerbation of a condition connected to the litigation. The Court found Mr Ellis's medical evidence, as presented, to be unpersuasive and insufficient to warrant an extension of time.

The application for an extension of time was dismissed.