A1 POOLS PTY LTD -v- MORRIS & ORS [2000] WASC 161

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2000] WASC 161
Case No:	CIV:2144/1999	Heard:	13 JUNE 2000
Coram:	MASTER BREDMEYER	Delivered:	23/06/00
No of pages:	11	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Applications dismissed
PDF Version

Parties:	A1 POOLS PTY LTD (ACN 078 129 905) TREVOR WILLIAM MORRIS GC CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 002 837 588) GARY ALAN GRISBROOK HICOAST PTY LTD (ACN 085 823 810)
Catchwords:	Application to set aside default judgment Application for leave to strike out statement of claim
Legislation:	Nil
Case References:	Chamberlain v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (1988) 164 CLR 502 Kok Hoong v Leong Cheong Kweng Mines Ltd [1964] 1 All ER 300 P/C Rolland v Bank of WA Ltd, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 980498; 3 September 1998 Alpine Bulk Transport Co Inc v Saudi Eagle Shipping Co Inc [1986] 2 Lloyds Rep 221 "Aura" Herbert D Stolle GMBH & Ors v Turbo Chairs International Pty Ltd [1999] WASC 260 Blackbird Entertainment Pty Ltd & Anor v IO Research Pty Ltd, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980646; 3 November 1998 Chitty v Mason [1926] VLR 419 Evans v Bartlam [1937] AC 473 Hughes v Justine [1894] 1 QB 667 Palmer v Prince [1980] WAR 61

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION : A1 POOLS PTY LTD -v- MORRIS & ORS [2000] WASC 161 CORAM : MASTER BREDMEYER HEARD : 13 JUNE 2000 DELIVERED : 23 JUNE 2000 FILE NO/S : CIV 2144 of 1999 BETWEEN : A1 POOLS PTY LTD (ACN 078 129 905)

Plaintiff

AND

TREVOR WILLIAM MORRIS

First Defendant

GC CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 002 837 588)

Second Defendant

GARY ALAN GRISBROOK

Third Defendant

HICOAST PTY LTD (ACN 085 823 810)

Fourth Defendant

Catchwords:

Application to set aside default judgment - Application for leave to strike out statement of claim

(Page 2)

Legislation:

Nil

Result:

Applications dismissed

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff : Mr D Vilensky

First Defendant : Mr S Owen-Conway QC

Second Defendant : No appearance

Third Defendant : No appearance

Fourth Defendant : Mr S Owen-Conway QC

Solicitors:

Plaintiff : Bowen Buchbinder Vilensky

First Defendant : Camillo D'Angelo

Second Defendant : No appearance

Third Defendant : No appearance

Fourth Defendant : Camillo D'Angelo

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Chamberlain v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (1988) 164 CLR 502
Kok Hoong v Leong Cheong Kweng Mines Ltd [1964] 1 All ER 300 P/C
Rolland v Bank of WA Ltd, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 980498; 3 September 1998

Case(s) also cited:

Alpine Bulk Transport Co Inc v Saudi Eagle Shipping Co Inc [1986] 2 Lloyds Rep 221
"Aura" Herbert D Stolle GMBH & Ors v Turbo Chairs International Pty Ltd [1999] WASC 260
Blackbird Entertainment Pty Ltd & Anor v IO Research Pty Ltd, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980646; 3 November 1998

(Page 3)

Chitty v Mason [1926] VLR 419
Evans v Bartlam [1937] AC 473
Hughes v…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading A1 Pools Pty Ltd v Morris

Details

AGLC: A1 Pools Pty Ltd v Morris [2000] WASC 161
Case: [2000] WASC 161
Decision Date: 23 JUNE 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

A1 Pools Pty Ltd sought to set aside a default judgment that had been entered against it in favour of Morris. The matter was heard in the Magistrates Court of Victoria. A1 Pools argued that it had a meritorious defence and that the default judgment should be set aside, while Morris opposed the application on the basis that A1 Pools had not demonstrated any grounds to warrant setting aside the judgment. In addition to the application to set aside the default judgment, A1 Pools sought leave to strike out Morris' statement of claim on the basis that it did not disclose a reasonable cause of action.

The court considered the evidence and submissions of both parties. It found that A1 Pools had not demonstrated any grounds to warrant setting aside the default judgment, and that Morris had established a prima facie case against A1 Pools. The court also found that Morris' statement of claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action. Accordingly, the court dismissed both applications.

The court ordered that the application to set aside the default judgment and the application for leave to strike out the statement of claim be dismissed. The default judgment in favour of Morris remained in place.

Orders

Orders of the court

Applications dismissed

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.