Sun v Hojunara International Group [2013] NSWSC 892

Sun v Hojunara International Group [2013] NSWSC 892

Although the judge would otherwise have been disposed to refuse Mr Kim's adjournment application because there was sufficient material from the verified answers to interrogatories to support a possible inference of relevant involvement, the plaintiffs had not attempted to serve Mr Jeon at the address he gave in March 2013 and therefore had not laid a proper foundation for substituted service. Because the application concerning Mr Jeon needed to be adjourned, it was proper to adjourn the extension of time application concerning Mr Kim as well so both matters could be heard together.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time to Bring Defamation Proceedings Under S 56 a Limitation Act 1969 (nsw), With Adjournment and Substituted Service Issues / Application Adjourned for Directions and Further Hearing
Outcome
Application for extension of time adjourned; leave granted to move for substituted service; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Bring Proceedings' 'online Publication' 'adjournment' 'substituted Service']
['defamation' 'limitation of Actions' 'practice and Procedure'] ['extension of Time to Bring Proceedings' 'online Publication' 'adjournment' 'substituted Service']

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

Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time to Bring Defamation Proceedings Under S 56 a Limitation Act 1969 (nsw), With Adjournment and Substituted Service Issues / Application Adjourned for Directions and Further Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiffs' application for an extension of time to bring defamation proceedings should proceed immediately or be adjourned." 'Whether there was sufficient material at the interlocutory stage to proceed against Mr Kim as a proposed additional defendant.' 'Whether the plaintiffs had made proper attempts to serve Mr Jeon sufficient to found an application for substituted service.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the judge would otherwise have been disposed to refuse Mr Kim's adjournment application because there was sufficient material from the verified answers to interrogatories to support a possible inference of relevant involvement, the plaintiffs had not attempted to serve Mr Jeon at the address he gave in March 2013 and therefore had not laid a proper foundation for substituted service. Because the application concerning Mr Jeon needed to be adjourned, it was proper to adjourn the extension of time application concerning Mr Kim as well so both matters could be heard together.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time adjourned; leave granted to move for substituted service; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time is adjourned for directions before Campbell J at 10am on Friday, 5 July 2013.' 'Leave is granted to the plaintiffs to move on an application for substituted service which may be filed in Court on that day and made returnable instanter.' 'Any representation on behalf of Mr...