Maatouk v Katrib [2022] NSWDC 463

Maatouk v Katrib [2022] NSWDC 463

Given the short duration of the defendant's delay, the difficulties both parties faced with pleadings and representation, and the presence of potentially viable defences, the default judgment and orders of 7 July 2022 should be set aside and the proceedings allowed to continue.

Parties
Plaintiff: Mr Peter Maatouk; Defendant: Ms Rima Katrib
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment
Outcome
Application to set aside default judgment granted
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Defamation, Setting Aside Orders, Serious Harm Pleading, Case Management
Civil Procedure Default Judgment Defamation Setting Aside Orders Serious Harm Pleading Case Management

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Peter Maatouk

Plaintiff

Ms Rima Katrib

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the default judgment should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether the defendant has an adequate explanation for delay
  3. 3 Whether the defendant has a viable defence

Ratio Decidendi

Given the short duration of the defendant's delay, the difficulties both parties faced with pleadings and representation, and the presence of potentially viable defences, the default judgment and orders of 7 July 2022 should be set aside and the proceedings allowed to continue.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside default judgment granted

Orders

  • Judgment and other orders entered on 7 July 2022 set aside.
  • Costs of this application reserved.