Lamont v Malishus Limited [2020] FCA 1535

Lamont v Malishus Limited [2020] FCA 1535

Where personal service is not practicable due to refusal and absence of an address for service, substituted service to an email address provided and acknowledged by the respondent is permissible, and service is deemed effective upon transmission.

Parties
Applicant: Darren Lamont; First Respondent: Malishus Limited; Second Respondent: Robert Jurcic; Third Respondent: Clinton Selwyn; Fourth Respondent: Rima Nicholas
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time and Substituted Service
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Practice and Procedure, Substituted Service, Service of Documents, Extension of Time, Trans Tasman Proceedings, Copyright

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Darren Lamont

Applicant

Malishus Limited

First Respondent

Robert Jurcic

Second Respondent

Clinton Selwyn

Third Respondent

Rima Nicholas

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time and Substituted Service

  1. 1 Should leave be granted to serve Mr Nicholas outside the jurisdiction?
  2. 2 Should leave be granted for substituted service on Mr Nicholas?

Ratio Decidendi

Where personal service is not practicable due to refusal and absence of an address for service, substituted service to an email address provided and acknowledged by the respondent is permissible, and service is deemed effective upon transmission.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Extension of time for applicant to file notice of appeal until 4pm on 23 October 2020.
  • Costs of application for extension of time are costs in the cause.