XTRA HEALTH PTY LIMITED V HERBAL CARE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED HC DUN CIV-2012-412-000536

XTRA HEALTH PTY LIMITED V HERBAL CARE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED HC DUN CIV-2012-412-000536

The applicants satisfied the statutory and rules-based evidentiary requirements for registration by producing a certified sealed copy of the Queensland judgment, proving service, swearing that the judgment was unsatisfied and enforceable in Queensland, and providing exchange rate and interest calculations; accordingly the High Court must register the foreign judgment and may impose the usual period to apply to set aside and stay enforcement pending that period.

Citation
openlaw-2bfce93f_0183_4343_a567_b3b0f97dc80d.pdf
Parties
First Judgment Creditor: Xtra Health Pty Limited; Second Judgment Creditor: Xtra Health NZ Limited; Third Judgment Creditor: AG Health Solutions Pty Ltd; First Judgment Debtor: Herbal Care New Zealand Limited; Second Judgment Debtor: Herbal Care International Limited; Third Judgment Debtor: Myron Roy Biernat
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
21 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Registration of Foreign Judgment Under Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1934 / Application for Registration Determined on the Papers
Outcome
Judgment of the District Court of Queensland dated 7 March 2012 registered under the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1934
Legal Topics
Registration of Foreign Judgment, Reciprocal Enforcement, Service of Proceedings, Interest on Judgment, Currency Conversion, Set Aside Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Xtra Health Pty Limited

First Judgment Creditor

Xtra Health NZ Limited

Second Judgment Creditor

AG Health Solutions Pty Ltd

Third Judgment Creditor

Herbal Care New Zealand Limited

First Judgment Debtor

Herbal Care International Limited

Second Judgment Debtor

Myron Roy Biernat

Third Judgment Debtor

Procedural Posture

Registration of Foreign Judgment Under Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1934 / Application for Registration Determined on the Papers

  1. 1 Whether the applicants proved the prescribed matters under the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1934 and High Court Rules Part 23
  2. 2 Whether the Queensland judgment had been wholly satisfied or could be enforced in the original court at the date of application
  3. 3 Whether the applicants provided a certified copy of the judgment, proof of service, and evidence of exchange rate and interest due

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants satisfied the statutory and rules-based evidentiary requirements for registration by producing a certified sealed copy of the Queensland judgment, proving service, swearing that the judgment was unsatisfied and enforceable in Queensland, and providing exchange rate and interest calculations; accordingly the High Court must register the foreign judgment and may impose the usual period to apply to set aside and stay enforcement pending that period.

Court Disposition

Judgment of the District Court of Queensland dated 7 March 2012 registered under the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1934

Orders

  • The District Court of Queensland judgment BD 4881 of 2011 dated 7 March 2012 is registered in New Zealand.
  • Any application to set aside the registration must be made within 30 working days from the date of service of notice of registration of the judgment.