A Federal Court judge has dismissed an application by political adviser Sally Rugg to continue working for teal MP Monique Ryan while their employment dispute plays out in court.
Justice Debra Mortimer this morning ruled that Ms Rugg's bid be thrown out, and said the case could now go to trial at a later date.
In her judgement, Justice Mortimer said "there is no real working relationship left between Ms Rugg and Dr Ryan, and it is unlikely to be restored during the trial process".
"I am far from persuaded Ms Rugg really wants to go back to work supporting and assisting Dr Ryan," she said.
"I do not consider the situation is likely to be tolerable, let alone productive and workable, for either of them."
The decision ends a dispute over Ms Rugg's employment status, which has seen the parties come to the Federal Court four times in five weeks.
A month of mediation between lawyers for Ms Rugg, Dr Ryan and the Commonwealth — technically the employer of federal political staffers — also failed.
Ms Rugg went to the Federal Court seeking an intervention to stop the termination of her $160,000-a-year job taking place at the end of January.
But a larger legal battle looms, with Ms Rugg seeking financial compensation from Dr Ryan and the Commonwealth, and for them to be fined for alleged breaches of the Fair Work Act.
Justice Mortimer stressed that her ruling today was not a reflection on whether the broader legal case brought by Ms Rugg would be successful. She estimated a Federal Court trial could run for about 15 days, and was unlikely to occur before July this year.
Ms Rugg's lawyers have argued their client was not properly compensated for sometimes working more than 70 hours a week, and that it could serve as a legal test case for what constitutes "reasonable" overtime hours in the workplace.
Dr Ryan said she would defend the action against her.
"I never once gave Ms Rugg a direction that she should work that many hours or that many days per week," she said in an affidavit.
'I don't think I've ever seen a case like this'
Ms Rugg went on stress leave in December 2022 and tendered her resignation, but later said she was pushed into doing so.
"I was hoping to preserve as much of my reputation and dignity as I could from the situation," Ms Rugg said.
The proposition of Ms Rugg returning to work for Dr Ryan was one the MP's lawyers and the Commonwealth did not want to entertain.
During some colourful flourishes in the courtroom, Commonwealth lawyer Nicholas Harrington summed up the current relationship between the parties.
"A form of trench warfare has broken out," he said last week.
"It is a relationship that has withered on the vine."
Last week, Justice Mortimer also appeared sceptical about reuniting the pair in the workplace.
"I don't think I've ever seen a case like this," she said.
In a statement, Ms Rugg's lawyer, Josh Bornstein, said she was "disappointed" at the court's ruling, but would now focus on the broader legal case.
"The issues to be considered at trial could have far-reaching ramifications for all Australians who work in industries where long hours are expected and normalised," Mr Bornstein said.
Relationship soured over COVID travel and weekend work
Affidavits released by the court have provided an insight into the intense working conditions in Dr Ryan's office.
Ms Rugg claimed Dr Ryan once said: "I want to be the prime minister one day and I need to know my staff are prepared to work hard for me."
Outside court last week, Dr Ryan said she was joking when she made the remarks.
During parliament sitting weeks, Ms Rugg said a standard day was "at least 12 hours", requiring her to attend meetings, brief Dr Ryan and handle media inquiries.
"My many responsibilities meant that I would usually work 70 or 80 hours a week. I almost always worked on both days of the weekend, writing speeches and doing other tasks," she said.
The relationship between Dr Ryan and her chief of staff soured following a number of incidents.
In November, Dr Ryan issued a formal warning to Ms Rugg for travelling on a plane while positive for COVID-19.
The pair also had disagreements about whether Ms Rugg should participate in "community engagement work", such as town hall events and fundraisers.
The court heard Dr Ryan took issue with several social media posts recently made by Ms Rugg.
