Nadin v Simtronic Technologies Pty Ltd

[2014] FCCA 3187

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NADIN v SIMTRONIC TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD [2014] FCCA 3187

Catchwords:
INDUSTRIAL LAW – Application made pursuant to s.548 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – application listed pursuant to Rule 13.12 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) ‑ no appearance – application dismissed.

Legislation:

Fair Work Act 2009, s.548

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.13.12

Applicant: CHRISTOPHER ADAM NADIN

Respondent: SIMTRONIC TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD

File Number: SYG 901 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Nicholls

Hearing date: 13 August 2014

Date of Last Submission: 13 August 2014

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 13 August 2014

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: No Appearance

Respondent: No Appearance

ORDERS

1. The application made on 1 May 2013 is dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.12(1) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 901 of 2013

CHRISTOPHER ADAM NADIN

Applicant

And

SIMTRONIC TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Ex Tempore; Revised from Transcript)

1. On 1 May 2013 Mr Christopher Adam Nadin (“the applicant”) made an application under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) claiming that Simtronic Technologies Pty Ltd (“the respondent”) had not paid him “outstanding accrued leave entitlements” at the cessation of his employment with him.

2. The applicant appeared at a first Court date on 22 May 2013. There was no appearance by or on behalf of the respondent. [The matter was set down for hearing on 14 November 2013. I note that, that date was vacated at the applicant’s request by email correspondence, on the Court’s file, on 11 November 2013.]

3. Having regard to the Court file, I note that since that date no action has been taken in this matter by the applicant to prosecute this matter. Nor has any action been taken by the respondent. 

4. On the Court’s initiative, having regard to r.13.12 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), I am of the view that these proceedings are dormant. There is no future listing for the proceeding, or part of the proceeding. There is no application in a case pending in these proceedings. Nor am I otherwise aware of any attempt to argue that the proceedings should not be dismissed.

5. Notice has been given to the parties of the time and place when the Court would consider making the order in the appropriate form. I have regard to communication from the Court dated 3 July 2014 to the only party who has filed an address for service in this matter, and that is the applicant. 

6. There is no communication to the respondent because there is no address for service for the respondent filed in this matter, and no address was otherwise reasonably available for that purpose.

7. In any event, I note that the applicant has not appeared today.  I am satisfied that the matter can be seen as being dormant and it is appropriate that the application be dismissed. I will make the order accordingly.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Nicholls

Associate: 

Date: 9 November 2015