Steinhoff Asia Pacific Limited v Markezz Pty Ltd and Anor [2009] NSWSC 1384

Steinhoff Asia Pacific Limited v Markezz Pty Ltd and Anor [2009] NSWSC 1384

No irregularity was shown in the making or entry of the judgment; the circumstances did not fall within the powers conferred by Rule 36.16 to set aside or vary a judgment after entry, and there was no other identified power to grant the relief sought.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Application to Set Aside Judgment
Outcome
Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
['amending and Setting Aside Orders' 'default Judgment' 'irregularity' 'reinstatement of Defence and Cross Claim']
['civil Procedure'] ['amending and Setting Aside Orders' 'default Judgment' 'irregularity' 'reinstatement of Defence and Cross Claim']

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

Notice of Motion / Application to Set Aside Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether default judgment should be set aside on grounds of irregularity under Rule 36.15 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005' 'Whether the orders sought were available under Rule 36.16 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005']

Ratio Decidendi

No irregularity was shown in the making or entry of the judgment; the circumstances did not fall within the powers conferred by Rule 36.16 to set aside or vary a judgment after entry, and there was no other identified power to grant the relief sought.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed

Orders

  • ["The defendants' motion to set aside judgment is dismissed." 'Costs to follow the event unless parties otherwise agree.']