Big Un Limited (in liq) & Anor v Evertz & Ors [2022] NSWSC 546

Big Un Limited (in liq) & Anor v Evertz & Ors [2022] NSWSC 546

The extension of time was warranted because there were sound reasons for the delay in service, including the plaintiffs' decision to complete further investigations before requiring the defendants to respond and the difficulties in locating and serving the first and second defendants; a further extension would not cause real prejudice to the defendants, whereas refusal might cause hardship to the plaintiffs due to possible limitation issues. Substituted service was warranted because lengthy attempts to locate the first defendant had been made, the evidence indicated he was likely living at the Rock Valley address, personal service in the usual manner may not practicably be effected, and...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion for Extension of Time for Service of Originating Process and Substituted Service / Procedural Ruling in the Equity Duty List
Outcome
Orders made extending time for service of the Amended Statement of Claim to 29 July 2022 and for substituted service on the first defendant.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time for Service' 'substituted Service' 'service of Originating Process' "directors' and Officers' Duties"]
['civil Procedure' 'corporations'] ['extension of Time for Service' 'substituted Service' 'service of Originating Process' "directors' and Officers' Duties"]

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion for Extension of Time for Service of Originating Process and Substituted Service / Procedural Ruling in the Equity Duty List

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time for service of the amended statement of claim should be extended to 29 July 2022.' 'Whether substituted service should be ordered in relation to the first defendant.']

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was warranted because there were sound reasons for the delay in service, including the plaintiffs' decision to complete further investigations before requiring the defendants to respond and the difficulties in locating and serving the first and second defendants; a further extension would not cause real prejudice to the defendants, whereas refusal might cause hardship to the plaintiffs due to possible limitation issues. Substituted service was warranted because lengthy attempts to locate the first defendant had been made, the evidence indicated he was likely living at the Rock Valley address, personal service in the usual manner may not practicably be effected, and...

Court Disposition

Orders made extending time for service of the Amended Statement of Claim to 29 July 2022 and for substituted service on the first defendant.

Orders

  • ['On 29 April 2022, the time for service under r 6.24(4)(a) of the Amended Statement of Claim filed on 29 March 2022 was extended to 29 July 2022.' "In lieu of personal service, service on the First Defendant be effected by the plaintiffs taking specified steps by 17 May 2022, including delivery of documents to the...