FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Pigozzo v Mineral Resources Ltd [2023] FCA 331
Appeal from: Pigozzo v Mineral Resources Ltd [2022] FCA 1166 File number: WAD 217 of 2022 Judgment of: COLVIN J Date of judgment: 3 April 2023 Date of publication of reasons: 12 April 2023 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - application for leave to appeal a decision of the Federal Court of Australia - where primary judge struck out paragraphs of statement of claim with leave to re-plead - where applicant alleges primary judge adopted an overly technical approach to the expression of pleadings - where applicant alleges substantial injustice - application dismissed Cases cited: Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris Incorporated (1981) 148 CLR 170
Barclay Mowlem Construction Ltd v Dampier Port Authority [2006] WASC 281; (2006) 33 WAR 82
Décor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1993) 33 FCR 397
Nationwide News Pty Limited v Rush [2018] FCAFC 70
Oztech Pty Ltd v Public Trustee of Queensland [2019] FCAFC 102; (2019) 269 FCR 349
Sabapathy v Jetstar Airways [2021] FCAFC 25; (2021) 283 FCR 348
Division: Fair Work Division Registry: Western Australia National Practice Area: Employment and Industrial Relations Number of paragraphs: 38 Date of hearing: 3 April 2023 Counsel for the Applicant: Mr B Collins KC with Ms CM Saraceni Solicitor for the Applicant: Harmers Workplace Lawyers Counsel for the First and Second Respondents: Mr S Penglis SC Solicitor for the First and Second Respondents: Bennett Counsel for the Third and Fourth Respondent: The Third and Fourth Respondents did not appear ORDERS
WAD 217 of 2022 BETWEEN: STEVEN PIGOZZO
Applicant
AND: MINERAL RESOURCES LTD (ACN 118 549 910)
First Respondent
CHRIS ELLISON
Second Respondent
BENNETT + CO
Third Respondent
ROBERT 'BOB' GAVRANICH
Fourth Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
COLVIN J
DATE OF ORDER:
3 APRIL 2023
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Until further order, no person shall publish any account of the hearing of the proceedings today.
2.The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
3.The question whether the order restricting publication of the hearing of these proceedings shall continue to be listed for hearing at 12.30 pm 3 April 2023.
4.The costs of the application for leave to appeal be reserved.
5.On or before 17 April 2023, any application for costs orders shall be brought by filing written submissions of no more than 5 pages and any necessary affidavit in support, such submissions to state the terms of any orders sought.
THE COURT NOTES THAT:
A.Later on 3 April 2023, a further order was made that order 1 shall not continue and limited non-publication orders were made.
Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
COLVIN J:
Mr Steven Pigozzo was formerly an employee of Mineral Resources Ltd (MRL). He claims to have been unlawfully dismissed from his employment. On…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Pigozzo v Mineral Resources 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] FCA 331
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues the court was required to decide included whether the primary judge's approach to the expression of pleadings was overly technical and whether this resulted in substantial injustice to the applicant. The court was also required to consider whether the applicant's application for leave to appeal should be granted.
In dismissing the application, the court found that the primary judge's approach to the expression of pleadings was not overly technical and that there was no substantial injustice caused to the applicant. The court held that the primary judge had correctly applied the law and that the applicant's application for leave to appeal should be dismissed. The court also made orders regarding the publication of the hearing of the proceedings and the costs of the application.
The court dismissed the application for leave to appeal and made several orders. These orders included a non-publication order that was later modified, an order reserving the costs of the application, and an order requiring any application for costs orders to be brought by filing written submissions and any necessary affidavits. The court also listed the question of whether the order restricting publication of the hearing of these proceedings shall continue to be heard on a specific date.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Until further order, no person shall publish any account of the hearing of the proceedings today.
2. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
3. The question whether the order restricting publication of the hearing of these proceedings shall continue to be listed for hearing at 12.30 pm 3 April 2023.
4. The costs of the application for leave to appeal be reserved.
5. On or before 17 April 2023, any application for costs orders shall be brought by filing written submissions of no more than 5 pages and any necessary affidavit in support, such submissions to state the terms of any orders sought.
THE COURT NOTES THAT:
A. Later on 3 April 2023, a further order was made that order 1 shall not continue and limited non-publication orders were made.
Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
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.