Saffari v Amazon.com Inc

[2021] FCCA 340

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:

1. These proceedings were commenced on 31 July 2019.  The first, second and third respondents are not within the jurisdiction.

2. 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. 

3. 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. . 

4. The Court is not satisfied that this is an appropriate case in which to extend the time for the validity of the application. 

5. 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