FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Saffari v Amazon.com Inc [2021] FCCA 340
File number(s): SYG 1934 of 2019 Judgment of: JUDGE STREET Date of judgment: 24 February 2021 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where first, second and third respondents are not within the jurisdiction – where no proper step has been taken to effect service on the first, second and third respondents – where more than 12 months has elapsed since the proceedings were commenced – application as against the first, second and third respondents is dismissed. Legislation: Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), rr. 1.05, 6.17 Number of paragraphs: 5 Date of hearing: 24 February 2021 Place: Sydney Counsel for the Applicant: In person Counsel for the Fourth Respondent: Mr A Byrne Solicitor for the Fourth Respondent: Dentons ORDERS
SYG 1934 of 2019 BETWEEN: SHAHRIAR SAFFARI
Applicant
AND: AMAZON.COM INC
First Respondent
JEFF BEZOS
Second Respondent
BOYD THIBODEAUX (and another named in the Schedule)
Third Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE STREET
DATE OF ORDER:
24 FEBRUARY 2021
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The application as against the first, second and third respondents is dismissed.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JUDGE STREET:
These proceedings were commenced on 31 July 2019. The first, second and third respondents are not within the jurisdiction.
No proper step has been taken to effect service on the first, second and third respondents in accordance with the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), as picked up by r 1.05 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) (“the Rules”). Under r 6.17 of the Rules, the application must be served within 12 months of the commencement of the proceedings. The proceedings were commenced on 31 July 2019.
The applicant believes that he has taken steps to effect service; however, they are not in accordance with the Federal Court Rules and the Rules. .
The Court is not satisfied that this is an appropriate case in which to extend the time for the validity of the application.
In those circumstances, the application is now stale as against the first, second and third respondents.
I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the transcript of the published oral reasons for judgment of Judge Street delivered in open Court on 24 February 2021 and the parties were sent a sealed copy of the Court’s orders. Associate:
Dated: 7 May 2021
SCHEDULE OF PARTIES
SYG 1934 of 2019 Respondents
Fourth Respondent:
ROCCO BRAEUNIGER
- AGLC
- Saffari v Amazon.com Inc [2021] FCCA 340
- Case
- [2021] FCCA 340
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the proceedings against the first, second, and third respondents should be dismissed due to a failure to properly serve them. This involved considering the time elapsed since the commencement of proceedings and the absence of any demonstrated steps taken by the applicant to effect service within the relevant timeframe.
Judge Street reasoned that the applicant had not taken any proper steps to serve the originating process on the first, second, and third respondents. Furthermore, more than 12 months had passed since the proceedings were initiated. Applying the relevant procedural rules concerning service and the timely prosecution of proceedings, the court concluded that the application as against these respondents should be dismissed. Consequently, the court ordered that the application as against the first, second, and third respondents be dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE STREET
DATE OF ORDER:
24 FEBRUARY 2021
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application as against the first, second and third respondents is dismissed.
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.