Saffari v Amazon.com, Inc (No 2)

The case of Saffari v Amazon.com, Inc (No 2) concerns an interlocutory application for specific discovery. The applicant sought discovery from a former director of an Australian subsidiary of Amazon, the fourth respondent, in proceedings concerning an application for leave to appeal two interlocutory decisions of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. The application was lodged for filing without supporting affidavit or evidence.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the interlocutory application could be accepted for filing in the absence of an affidavit or other evidence. The court had to determine if the application was adequately supported to warrant consideration. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the absence of the necessary evidence could be justified or if it necessitated refusal under Rule 1.37 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).

In reaching its decision, the court considered the procedural requirements outlined in the Federal Court Rules. It was noted that the Rules mandate that applications be supported by appropriate evidence, and the absence of such evidence could result in the application not being accepted for filing. The court found that the applicant had failed to provide the necessary affidavit or evidence to substantiate the application, thereby failing to meet the procedural requirements. Consequently, the court made an order under Rule 1.37 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) that the Registrar refuse to accept for filing the interlocutory application. The order specifically directed that the Registrar should not accept the application dated 1 June 2022 for filing due to the lack of supporting affidavit or evidence.