Marida Holdings Ltd. v. Wang
The Court held that the substitutional service order granted by the chambers judge conferred standing on the respondent to apply under R.22-1(3); the chambers judge correctly applied the three Ibrahim factors and reasonably found the respondent was not guilty of willful delay or default, so there was no palpable and overriding error of fact or legal error in setting aside the damages assessment and default judgment (the default judgment was properly set aside under R.3-8(11)).
Source excerpt
- Default judgment
- Damages assessment
- Substitutional service
- Service of process
- Set aside under r.22-1(3)
- Set aside under r.3-8(11)