Rana v Google Inc

[2021] FCA 1360

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Rana v Google Inc [2021] FCA 1360

File number:

SAD 147 of 2021

Judgment of:

COLVIN J

Date of judgment:

3 November 2021

Catchwords:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - application for service outside of jurisdiction - whether Court persuaded proceedings would not be stayed as abuse of process - whether compelling reason why application should be refused - whether documents abuse of process or demonstrate good arguable case - application refused

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - application for leave to serve respondents pursuant to s 21 of Defamation Act 2005 (SA) - where provision provides permission of court required to bring further defamation proceedings in relation to same defamatory matter - where no explanation provided by applicant supporting application for leave - application refused

Legislation:

Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 10.43

Defamation Act 2005 (SA) s 21

Cases cited:

Duffy v Google LLC [2019] SASC 157

Nyoni v Murphy [2018] FCAFC 75; (2018) 261 FCR 164

Rana v Registrar Cridland [2021] FCA 848

Trina Solar (US), Inc v Jasmin Solar Pty Ltd [2017] FCAFC 6; (2017) 247 FCR 1

Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pty Ltd (1990) 171 CLR 538

Division:

General Division

Registry:

South Australia

National Practice Area:

Other Federal Jurisdiction

Number of paragraphs:

23

Date of last submissions:

23 September 2021 (Applicant)

Date of hearing:

Determined on the papers

Counsel for the Applicant:

The Applicant appeared in person

Counsel for the Respondents:

The Respondents did not appear

ORDERS

SAD 147 of 2021

BETWEEN:

RANJIT SHAMSHER JUNG BAHADUR RANA

Applicant

AND:

GOOGLE INC

First Respondent

AUTOMATTIC INC

Second Respondent

JANICE DUFFY

Third Respondent

DARDA GREGUREV
Fourth Respondent

NINA GREGUREV
Fifth Respondent

MICROSOFT CORPORATION INC
Sixth Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	COLVIN J
DATE OF ORDER:	3 NOVEMBER 2021

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application by the applicant for leave to serve the originating application and document entitled 'Final Substituted Statement of Claim' on each of the first, second and sixth respondents is refused.

2.The application for an order under s 21 of the Defamation Act 2005 (SA) in respect of the claim in these proceedings is refused with liberty to bring a further application.

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

COLVIN J:

1. Mr Rana has commenced defamation proceedings against six respondents. As to three of those respondents, Google Inc, Automattic Inc and Microsoft Corporation Inc he seeks leave to serve the proceedings out of the jurisdiction. As to two other respondents, Ms Darda Gregurev and Ms Nina Gregurev he seeks leave to serve the application on them pursuant to s 21 of the Defamation Act 2005 (SA). Mr Rana was invited to make written submissions in support of his applications and was afforded an opportunity for the matters to then be listed for oral argument or for the applications to be dealt with on the papers. Mr Rana indicated that he was content for his applications to be dealt with on…