Olsen v Wellard Feeds Pty Ltd

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

OLSEN v WELLARD FEEDS PTY LTD [2007] FMCA 1885

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for particulars – objects of Act and Rules – informal streamlined judicial process – sufficient particulars of claim in affidavits already filed.

Federal Magistrates Act 1999 (Cth) ss.3, 42 and 45(1)
Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth), rr.1.03 and 10.01(3)(m)

Bailey & Ors v Beagle Management Pty Ltd & Ors (2001) 182 ALR 264; [2001] FCA 60
Goodall v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2007] FMCA 218
Woodroffe & Anor v National Crime Authority & Ors (1999) 168 ALR 585; [1999] FCA 1689

Applicant: CHELSEA OLSEN

Respondent: WELLARD FEEDS PTY LTD

File Number: PEG 170 of 2007

Judgment of: Lucev FM

Hearing date: 7 November 2007

Date of Last Submission: 7 November 2007

Delivered at: Perth

Delivered on: 7 November 2007

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr R. Hassal

Solicitors for the Applicant: Sparke Helmore

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr B.R. Jackson

Solicitors for the Respondent: DLA Phillips Fox

ORDERS

1. The Application for particulars is dismissed.

2. The Respondent shall pay the costs of the Applicant fixed at $1,455.00 pursuant to Order 21.02(2)(a) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
PERTH

PEG 170 of 2007

CHELSEA OLSEN

Applicant

And

WELLARD FEEDS PTY LTD

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Revised from Transcript)

Application

1. This is an application in a case filed on 24 October 2007, by the Respondent to the substantive proceedings. As amended the application seeks further and better particulars of the statement of claim, as follows:

   In respect of paragraph 3; provide further and better particulars as to what position was Mr West employed in by the Respondent during the employment.

   In respect of paragraph 10; provide further and better particulars as to what is the principal purpose of Mr West’s work that was allegedly covered by the classifications of the award.

2. Paragraph 3 of the statement of claim pleads that the Respondent employed Ronald West between 27 December 1990 and 5 July 2006 at the Respondent’s Wongan Hills site. Paragraph 10 of the statement of claim pleads that the principal purpose of Mr West’s work, which he undertook for the Respondent, was work covered by the classifications of the award. In that regard it is relevant to note that the Applicant now relies upon paragraph 13 of the statement of claim only, that Mr West’s work for the Respondent was covered by stock feed milling level 7.

The law

1. The provisions of the Federal Magistrates Act 1999 (Cth)[1] and Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth),[2] in particular ss.3 and 42 and rule 1.03, together with rule 10.01(3)(m), are required to be considered in the exercise of the Court’s discretion as to whether or not to order particulars.

   [1] “FM Act”.

   [2] “FMC Rules”.

2. In Goodall v Nationwide News Pty Ltd[3], this Court said as follows:

   [3] [2007] FMCA 218 (“Goodall”).

   “Reading together the objects of the…