FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Newton v Gallawah Pty Ltd [2023] FedCFamC2G 747
File numbers: MLG 974 of 2023 Judgment of: JUDGE CHAMPION Date of judgment: 21 August 2023 Catchwords: INDUSTRIAL LAW – Application pursuant to s. 370(a)(ii) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) for extension of time within which to make a general protections court application – whether Applicant has reasonable explanation for delay – representative error – extension of time granted Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss. 368, 370 Cases cited: Brisbane South Health Authority v Taylor (1996) 186 CLR 541; [1996] HCA 25
Brodie-Hanns v MTV Publishing Ltd (1995) 67 IR 298
Division: Division 2 General Federal Law Number of paragraphs: 17 Date of last submissions: 18 August 2023 Date of hearing: On the papers Place: Melbourne Solicitor for the Applicant: Saines Legal Solicitor for the Respondent: McCracken & McCracken Lawyers ORDERS
MLG 974 of 2023 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: LEAH NEWTON
Applicant
AND: GALLAWAH PTY LTD
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE CHAMPION
DATE OF ORDER:
21 AUGUST 2023
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.An extension of time be granted for the filing of the application and the matter proceed as if it was filed within time.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: The Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.05(2)(g) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.05 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JUDGE CHAMPION:
INTRODUCTION
The Applicant Ms Leah Newton (Ms Newton) seeks an extension of time pursuant to s. 370(a)(ii) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) to make a general protections court application in relation to an alleged contravention or contraventions of Part 3.1 of the Act. The Respondent is her former employer, Gallawah Pty Ltd. (Gallawah). Ms Newton’s court application was made on 2 June 2023, some 20 days after the 14 day period set out in s. 370(a)(ii) of the Act. The evidence on this extension of time application is that Ms Newton’s court application was late because of her representative’s inexperience and unfamiliarity with the Court’s eLodgment system.
In circumstances in which the delay is short, the delay is due to the inexperience of her representative and Gallawah claims no prejudice because of the delay, it is in the interests of justice to extend time. Except to note that on the face of the material currently before the Court the Applicant may have an arguable claim, it is not possible to form any more definitive view (one way or the other) as to…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Newton v Gallawah Pty Ltd and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2023] FedCFamC2G 747
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered the circumstances of the delay, noting that Mr Parry's inexperience and error in not ensuring the fee was paid constituted a reasonable explanation for the delay. The court held that Ms Newton's representative's error was not attributable to her, and she had acted promptly to address the issue once she became aware of it. The court also noted that Gallawah did not oppose the application and had not suffered any prejudice. The court found that the delay was reasonable and granted the extension of time.
The court concluded that the delay in lodging Ms Newton's application was due to an error by her representative, which was not attributable to her. The court granted the application for an extension of time, allowing Ms Newton to lodge her general protections court application. The court did not make any further orders.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.