Morrison v ISS Australia T/A ISS Facility Services (No.2)

In *Morrison v ISS Australia T/A ISS Facility Services (No.2)*, the applicant, Morrison, sought an extension of time to file an application, which had already been heard substantively by Kendall J of the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute arose from Morrison's desire to pursue an industrial law claim after the substantive hearing had concluded.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether to grant an extension of time for the applicant to file their substantive application, notwithstanding that the merits of that application had already been fully argued. The Court was required to consider the principles governing applications for extensions of time, particularly in circumstances where the applicant alleged an error on the part of their legal representative.

Kendall J reasoned that while there is a general requirement for applications to be filed within prescribed time limits, the Court retains a discretion to extend time. In this instance, the Court found that both parties had already participated in a full hearing on the substantive application, meaning both had the benefit of presenting their case. Crucially, there was no evidence of prejudice to the respondent, ISS Australia, arising from the delay. Applying these considerations, the Court determined that it was fair to grant the extension of time. The Court made orders granting the extension of time.