Souraki Azad v Mithila Family Trust t/as Rockingham GP

Souraki Azad brought an application against the Mithila Family Trust trading as Rockingham GP, and three other respondents. The dispute arose from employment issues related to a general practitioner’s practice. The case was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The legal issues before the court involved the procedural steps required for the applicant to proceed with their claims and the appropriate handling of the costs sought by the respondents. The court needed to determine whether the application could proceed as an originating application and if so, under what conditions. Additionally, the court had to decide on the procedural requirements for filing a concise statement and an application for an interlocutory injunction, as well as the timelines for submitting and responding to submissions regarding costs.

The court ruled that the application against the fourth respondent be dismissed. However, the application would stand as an originating application. The applicant was required to file and serve a concise statement and an application for an interlocutory injunction. Upon filing these documents, the application would be listed for a hearing. If the applicant did not file an application for an interlocutory injunction by 29 May 2023, the matter would be listed for case management. The applicant was also required to file submissions opposing the costs sought by the first to third respondents and the fourth respondent by 15 May 2023. The respondents had to file and serve their replies by 29 May 2023. The question of costs was to be determined on the papers, and the court referred the applicants for legal assistance in formulating their claims.