Bain v International Capital Markets Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 283

Bain v International Capital Markets Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 283

Given UAE is not a signatory to Hague Convention, no Australia-UAE process service treaty, and applicant received legal advice that service is not possible under UAE law, substituted service by email, registered mail to Dubai, and via First Respondent are necessary and permitted under Federal Court Rules rr 10.24 and 10.44.

Parties
Applicant: Nathaniel James Bain; First Respondent: International Capital Markets Pty Ltd ACN 123 289 109; Second Respondent: Andrew Leon Budzinski
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceeding Under Part IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth) / Interlocutory Application for Substituted Service/orders Regarding Service Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Orders for substituted service granted; other interlocutory relief dismissed; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Service of Process Out of Jurisdiction, Substituted Service, Contracts for Difference (cfds), Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, Unconscionable Conduct, Duty of Care, Negligent Misstatement
Practice and Procedure Commercial Law Corporations Law Service of Process Out of Jurisdiction Substituted Service Contracts for Difference (cfds) Misleading and Deceptive Conduct Unconscionable Conduct +2 more

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nathaniel James Bain

Applicant

International Capital Markets Pty Ltd ACN 123 289 109

First Respondent

Andrew Leon Budzinski

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Representative Proceeding Under Part IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth) / Interlocutory Application for Substituted Service/orders Regarding Service Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether substituted service should be ordered on the Second Respondent residing in UAE
  2. 2 Interpretation and application of Federal Court Rules for service outside Australia
  3. 3 Applicability of Hague Convention and UAE law regarding service

Ratio Decidendi

Given UAE is not a signatory to Hague Convention, no Australia-UAE process service treaty, and applicant received legal advice that service is not possible under UAE law, substituted service by email, registered mail to Dubai, and via First Respondent are necessary and permitted under Federal Court Rules rr 10.24 and 10.44.

Court Disposition

Orders for substituted service granted; other interlocutory relief dismissed; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Applicant has leave to serve the Statement of Claim, Genuine Steps Statement, copy of orders, and notice under r 10.43B outside Australia.
  • Applicant may effect service on Second Respondent by email, by pre-paid registered mail to Dubai address, and by forwarding via First Respondent.