Australian Securities Commission v. Macleod, R.J. & Ors [1994] FCA 901

Australian Securities Commission v. Macleod, R.J. & Ors [1994] FCA 901

Where final judgment is sought against a respondent pursuant to O 10, r 7(1)(b) for default in complying with directions, the applicant must provide legally admissible evidence not only of the Court's jurisdiction and discretionary justification but also of all material facts necessary to prove entitlement to the relief claimed. Judgment will only be entered where the default is clear and there is demonstrable intent not to cooperate with the court process.

Parties
Applicant: Australian Securities Commission; First Respondent: Robert James Macleod; Second Respondent: Trainex Pty. Ltd. A.C.N. 001506332; Third Respondent: A.C.N. 051750442; Fourth Respondent: A.C.N. 055168128; Fifth Respondent: Star Partners Pty. Ltd. A.C.N. 055168155
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 November 1994
Procedural Posture
Application for Judgment Under Federal Court Rules Due to Non Compliance With Directions / Post Directions, Before Final Judgment (adjourned for Further Orders)
Outcome
Application for judgment upheld; matter adjourned for settlement of orders
Legal Topics
Default Judgment Procedures, Compliance With Court Directions, Case Management Under Federal Court Rules, Admissibility of Evidence for Summary Judgment
Practice and Procedure Corporations Law Default Judgment Procedures Compliance With Court Directions Case Management Under Federal Court Rules Admissibility of Evidence for Summary Judgment

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 3 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Australian Securities Commission

Applicant

Robert James Macleod

First Respondent

Trainex Pty. Ltd. A.C.N. 001506332

Second Respondent

A.C.N. 051750442

Third Respondent

A.C.N. 055168128

Fourth Respondent

Star Partners Pty. Ltd. A.C.N. 055168155

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Judgment Under Federal Court Rules Due to Non Compliance With Directions / Post Directions, Before Final Judgment (adjourned for Further Orders)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to judgment under Order 10, rule 7(1)(b) for the respondents' failure to comply with court directions to provide particulars
  2. 2 Whether the applicant must prove its entitlement to judgment by admissible evidence when seeking a final judgment under the rule

Ratio Decidendi

Where final judgment is sought against a respondent pursuant to O 10, r 7(1)(b) for default in complying with directions, the applicant must provide legally admissible evidence not only of the Court's jurisdiction and discretionary justification but also of all material facts necessary to prove entitlement to the relief claimed. Judgment will only be entered where the default is clear and there is demonstrable intent not to cooperate with the court process.

Court Disposition

Application for judgment upheld; matter adjourned for settlement of orders

Orders

  • The matter is adjourned to Tuesday, 22 November, 1994 at 9.00 a.m.
  • Applicant entitled to final judgment in at least the terms of paragraphs 1, 2A, 3A, 4 and 4A of the amended application filed 11 March 1993, subject to lodging a draft judgment.