FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Sievwright v State of Victoria (No 3) [2014] FCA 75
Citation: Sievwright v State of Victoria (No 3) [2014] FCA 75 Parties: JADE SIEVWRIGHT (BY HER NEXT FRIEND ANNE WITCOMBE) v STATE OF VICTORIA (DEPT. OF EDUCATION AND EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT) File number: VID 844 of 2012 Judge: JESSUP J Date of judgment: 13 February 2014 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Applicant under legal incapacity – Approval of settlement Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 9.70, 9.71(2)(c) Cases cites: Sievwright v State of Victoria [2012] FCA 118
Sievwright v State of Victoria [2013] FCA 964Date of hearing: 13 February 2014 Place: Melbourne Division: GENERAL DIVISION Category: Catchwords Number of paragraphs: 5 Counsel for the Applicant: T McCarthy Solicitor for the Applicant: Maurice Blackburn Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: C P Young Solicitor for the Respondent: Corrs Chambers Westgarth
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
VID 844 of 2012
BETWEEN: JADE SIEVWRIGHT (BY HER NEXT FRIEND ANNE WITCOMBE)
ApplicantAND: STATE OF VICTORIA (DEPT. OF EDUCATION AND EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT)
Respondent
JUDGE:
JESSUP J
DATE OF ORDER:
13 FEBRUARY 2014
WHERE MADE:
MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Pursuant to rule 9.70 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), the settlement of this proceeding set out in the Deed of Release dated 18 December 2013 marked as Exhibit EG-1 to the affidavit of Emeline Gaske affirmed on 31 January 2014 be approved.
2.The proceeding be dismissed.
3.There be no order as to costs.
4.Exhibits EG-1 and EG-3 of the affidavit of Emeline Gaske filed on 31 January 2014 be treated as confidential and be retained in their respective envelopes, those envelopes not to be opened without the permission of a Judge of this Court.
Note:Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
VID 844 of 2012
BETWEEN: JADE SIEVWRIGHT (BY HER NEXT FRIEND ANNE WITCOMBE)
ApplicantAND: STATE OF VICTORIA (DEPT. OF EDUCATION AND EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT)
Respondent
JUDGE:
JESSUP J
DATE:
13 FEBRUARY 2014
PLACE:
MELBOURNE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Before the court is an application pursuant to r 9.70 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) for the approval of a settlement of this proceeding, expressed in a deed of release signed on behalf of the parties on 18 December 2013.
For the purposes of considering that application, I have read the reasons for judgment of Marshall J given in final disposition of claims made in an earlier proceeding between the same parties on 21 February 2012: Sievwright v State of Victoria [2012] FCA 118.
I have recently made an interlocutory order for the striking out of substantial aspects of the applicant’s Statement of Claim in this proceeding, and I take into account the matters to which I adverted in my reasons given on that occasion: Sievwright v State of Victoria [2013] FCA 964. That interlocutory process gave me the benefit of understanding the dimensions, the nature and the strength of the applicant’s case in many respects.
I have read the affidavits filed in support of the present application, namely, the affidavit of Anne Witcombe sworn on 29 January 2014 and the affidavit of Emeline Gaske affirmed 31 January 2014. I have, of course, read and considered the deed of release which embodies the settlement, and I have also had the benefit of reading a memorandum of advice by Melinda Richards SC furnished on 22 January 2014, conformably with r 9.71(2)(c).
Taking into account all of those matters, I accept what has been submitted today on behalf of both parties in the case, namely, that the settlement reached on 18 December 2013 is in the best interests of the applicant and should be given the approval of the court.
I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Jessup. Associate:
Dated: 19 February 2014
- AGLC
- Sievwright v State of Victoria (No 3) [2014] FCA 75
- Case
- [2014] FCA 75
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the Deed of Release and the affidavit of Emeline Gaske, who provided an affirmation that the settlement was appropriate. The court considered the nature of the applicant's legal incapacity and the implications for the fairness and reasonableness of the settlement. The court noted the lack of any objections to the settlement and concluded that the terms were indeed fair, reasonable, and in the best interests of the applicant.
In light of these considerations, the court approved the settlement as outlined in the Deed of Release. The court dismissed the proceeding and made no order as to costs. Additionally, the court directed that the Deed of Release and certain exhibits be treated as confidential and remain sealed unless opened by a judge of the court. The orders were entered in accordance with Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Pursuant to rule 9.70 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), the settlement of this proceeding set out in the Deed of Release dated 18 December 2013 marked as Exhibit EG-1 to the affidavit of Emeline Gaske affirmed on 31 January 2014 be approved.
2. The proceeding be dismissed.
3. There be no order as to costs.
4. Exhibits EG-1 and EG-3 of the affidavit of Emeline Gaske filed on 31 January 2014 be treated as confidential and be retained in their respective envelopes, those envelopes not to be opened without the permission of a Judge of this Court.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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.