VASOVIC v Toast FOOD

[2015] FCCA 3447

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VASOVIC v TOAST FOOD [2015] FCCA 3447

Catchwords:
INDUSTRIAL LAW – Application listed pursuant to r.13.12(1) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) – no appearance by parties – application dismissed.

Legislation:

Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.13.12

Applicant: MILLAN VASOVIC

Respondent: TOAST FOOD

File Number: SYG 1439 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Nicholls

Hearing date: 9 December 2015

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 9 December 2015

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: No Appearance

Respondent: No Appearance

ORDERS

1. The application made on 26 June 2013 is dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.12(1) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 1439 of 2013

MILLAN VASOVIC

Applicant

And

TOAST FOOD

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Ex Tempore; Revised from Transcript)

1. I have before me today an application made pursuant to the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) on 26 June 2013 by the applicant, Mr Millan Vasovic. The respondent was said to be Toast Food. The applicant alleged that the respondent had breached the National Employment Standards and his contract of employment in a number of ways.

2. When the matter first came before the Court on 17 July 2013, the applicant appeared in person.  Leave was granted to a solicitor to represent the respondent. An order was made that the respondent file and serve a response by 31 July 2013. A further order was made that the parties attend mediation to be conducted by a Registrar of this Court. 

3. The matter was subsequently set down for directions on 13 August 2014. The applicant appeared in person.  There was no appearance by, or on behalf of, the respondent.  The applicant stated that it appeared that the respondent had been placed into liquidation. Nothing was put to the Court to say that the matter would progress before the Court. 

4. Nonetheless, the applicant was given the opportunity to obtain any further legal advice, and the matter was set down for further directions on 10 September 2014.  On that date, the applicant again appeared in person and there was no appearance by the respondent.  The applicant was put on notice that there was an opportunity, if he felt that he could not take the matter any further, to file a Notice of Discontinuance of the application.  He was put on notice that if no action was taken in this case in the following six months that the Court would, of its own motion, seek to have the matter dismissed.

5. I note on the Court’s file a letter dated 12 November 2015 to the applicant, at the address for service, putting him on notice that the matter was set down for directions today at 9.30 am and again reminding him of the operation of r.13.12 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth). There has been no appearance by, or on behalf of, the applicant today and no appearance by anyone on behalf of the respondent.

6. No action has been taken in this case in the preceding six months.  It is appropriate that the application be dismissed for want of prosecution.

I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Nicholls

Associate: 

Date:  22 December 2015