He wanted subpoenas, an evidence freeze and a witness restraint - the court weighed all 14 requests
A worker asked a federal court for sweeping pre-trial orders against his former employer. The court granted none of them.
In a decision delivered on August 3, 2026, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia dismissed a self-represented worker's application for 14 interlocutory orders in his general protections case against a Western Australian mining contractor.
The worker had been employed as a supervisor for under five months at a Fortescue mine site, starting in October 2024 and leaving in March 2025. He then brought a claim under the general protections provisions of the Fair Work Act, which protect employees who exercise a "workplace right" - such as making a complaint or lodging an application - from suffering adverse action as a result. He alleges he was forced out for raising concerns. The employer says he was dismissed for a different reason: the role required a full driver's licence, which he did not hold.
Before the substantive claim could be heard, the worker applied on an ex parte basis - meaning without notice to the employer - for a wide range of orders. He sought leave to issue subpoenas, an order requiring the company and others to preserve all documents, emails, CCTV footage and USB drives connected to his case, the return of property he said had been taken from his locked quarters at the mine, an order restraining the company from destroying...
KUALA TERENGGANU: Three Rahmah Sales Programme (PJRM) operators in Terengganu have been suspended after being found guilty of violating operational guidelines, including submitting false subsidy c...