Rota v Fire Rescue Victoria

In the matter of Rota v Fire Rescue Victoria, the applicants sought approval to discontinue a representative proceeding concerning the management of COVID-19 risks and vaccination status reporting by Fire Rescue Victoria (FRV). The applicants, who were seeking relief on behalf of FRV employees, had originally intended to proceed with the claim funded by the Australian Firefighters Alliance (AFA). However, due to funding issues, the AFA instructed the applicants to discontinue the proceeding. The FRV, as the respondent, was subsequently notified of the intended discontinuance. The applicants filed an interlocutory application seeking court approval for the discontinuance and no orders as to costs.

The legal issues before the court included whether the discontinuance would be unfair, unreasonable, or adverse to the interests of the class members and whether any limitation periods applicable to the group members’ claims would begin to run again upon discontinuance. The court considered the principles set out in Babscay v Pitcher Partners and Wruck v Telstra Limited, which emphasize that the court must be satisfied that class members have been given notice of the proposal to discontinue the proceeding and that there are no incidental consequences for group members that may foreseeably arise by reason of the court’s approval to discontinue.

The court approved the discontinuance of the proceeding, noting that each class member had consented to the discontinuance and that there were no other incidental consequences for group members that would arise from the discontinuance. The court also ordered that any limitation period that applies to any of the class members would begin to run again from 60 days after the making of the order.

The court’s final orders included granting approval for the discontinuance of the proceeding, discontinuing the proceeding, and resetting the limitation periods for the class members. There were no orders as to costs.