26 Feb 2024
Because the respondent failed to beat the sanctioned offer and did not participate in or oppose the application, indemnity costs were justified; enhanced interest was appropriate but reduced to 1% above judgment rate given the small margin between the sanctioned offer (including advance payment) and the judgment sum.
11 Jun 2020
Applicant failed to demonstrate a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds with sufficient precise and believable evidence; alleged implied term and promissory estoppel were unsupported by particulars or evidence and contradicted by the written agreements; AXA validly exercised contractual termination and demanded repayment; application to set aside the statutory demand is dismissed.
2 Nov 2010
Because the defendant did not attend trial and the plaintiff's witnesses proved the claim, the court accepted the plaintiff's account that the running account was closed at the July meeting, that plaintiff paid $51,869,687 and accepted $49,774,735 of goods, and awarded the plaintiff $2,094,952 and $315,025; the defendant's counterclaim was dismissed.