Jamie Darren Lonsdale & Anor v Gilbert & (2) Ors [2007] NSWLEC 36

Jamie Darren Lonsdale & Anor v Gilbert & (2) Ors [2007] NSWLEC 36

The requirements of personal service under Pt 42 r 8 of the Supreme Court Rules 1970 are dispensed with because Mr Gilbert had actual knowledge of the terms of the order, was warned of the potential for imprisonment for non-compliance, and was represented in court at the time of judgment. Therefore, the contempt proceedings may proceed notwithstanding lack of formal service.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Contempt Proceedings / Determination of Amended Notice of Motion for Contempt
Outcome
Contempt found; question of punishment adjourned; opportunity to purge contempt granted.
Legal Topics
['enforcement of Court Orders' 'personal Service Requirements' 'discretion to Dispense With Service' 'knowledge of Court Orders' 'opportunity to Purge Contempt']
['contempt of Court' 'practice and Procedure'] ['enforcement of Court Orders' 'personal Service Requirements' 'discretion to Dispense With Service' 'knowledge of Court Orders' 'opportunity to Purge Contempt']

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

Contempt Proceedings / Determination of Amended Notice of Motion for Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the requirements of service under Part 42, rule 8 of the Supreme Court Rules 1970 should be dispensed with in the circumstance where the respondent had knowledge of the order but was not personally served' 'Whether the respondent is in contempt of court for failure to comply with order within time specified' "Appropriate response to respondent's contempt given efforts to comply and knowledge of potential penalties"]

Ratio Decidendi

The requirements of personal service under Pt 42 r 8 of the Supreme Court Rules 1970 are dispensed with because Mr Gilbert had actual knowledge of the terms of the order, was warned of the potential for imprisonment for non-compliance, and was represented in court at the time of judgment. Therefore, the contempt proceedings may proceed notwithstanding lack of formal service.

Court Disposition

Contempt found; question of punishment adjourned; opportunity to purge contempt granted.

Orders

  • ["The requirements of service of the Court's orders under Part 42, rule 8 of the Supreme Court Rules 1970 are dispensed with." 'It is found beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, Paul David Gilbert, is in contempt of court for failure to comply with Order No. 2 made by the Court on 30 January 2006.' 'The...