Anabelle Bits Pty Ltd v Fujitsu Ltd [2007] FCA 1190

Anabelle Bits Pty Ltd v Fujitsu Ltd [2007] FCA 1190

There was sufficient material to show that the Court had jurisdiction, that the proceeding was of a kind mentioned in Order 8 rule 2, and that the applicant had a prima facie case. Evidence established that there was no convention, treaty or other agreement in force between Australia and Japan on service of documents in civil proceedings, and that Japanese law permits service through the diplomatic channel. The requirements of Order 8 rule 3(2)(a), (b) and (c) were therefore satisfied, so leave to serve the Application and Statement of Claim on the first respondent by diplomatic channel was granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Serve Originating Process on a Person in a Foreign Country / Interlocutory Application Under Order 8 Rule 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules
Outcome
Leave granted to file the affidavit and to serve the Application and Statement of Claim on the first respondent by using the diplomatic channel.
Legal Topics
['service of Originating Process in a Foreign Country' 'service by Diplomatic Channel' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'common Law Duty of Care' 'defective Hard Disk Drives']
['civil Procedure' 'private International Law' 'trade Practices' 'negligence'] ['service of Originating Process in a Foreign Country' 'service by Diplomatic Channel' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'common Law Duty of Care' 'defective Hard Disk Drives']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Serve Originating Process on a Person in a Foreign Country / Interlocutory Application Under Order 8 Rule 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should have leave under Order 8 rule 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules to serve the Application and Statement of Claim on the first respondent by using the diplomatic channel.' 'Whether the Court was satisfied that it had jurisdiction, that the proceeding was of a kind mentioned in Order 8 rule 2, and that the applicant had a prima facie case for the relief claimed.' 'Whether service through the diplomatic channel was permitted in Japan where there was no convention, treaty or other agreement in force between Australia and Japan on service of documents in civil proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient material to show that the Court had jurisdiction, that the proceeding was of a kind mentioned in Order 8 rule 2, and that the applicant had a prima facie case. Evidence established that there was no convention, treaty or other agreement in force between Australia and Japan on service of documents in civil proceedings, and that Japanese law permits service through the diplomatic channel. The requirements of Order 8 rule 3(2)(a), (b) and (c) were therefore satisfied, so leave to serve the Application and Statement of Claim on the first respondent by diplomatic channel was granted.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to file the affidavit and to serve the Application and Statement of Claim on the first respondent by using the diplomatic channel.

Orders

  • ['Grants leave to the applicant to file in Court the affidavit of Frederic Joseph Alfred Cassis sworn 25 July 2007.' 'Orders that the applicant have leave pursuant to Order 8 rule 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules to serve the Application and the Statement of Claim on the first respondent by using the diplomatic...