Daybest Pty Ltd v Sou and Ho Trading Investments Pty Ltd

Daybest Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought to set aside a default judgment entered against it in favour of Sou and Ho Trading Investments Pty Ltd (the respondent). The dispute arose from an alleged breach of a commercial lease agreement. The application to set aside the default judgment was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant had established sufficient grounds to set aside the default judgment. This required the Court to consider whether the applicant had a meritorious defence to the respondent's claim and whether it had provided a reasonable explanation for its failure to file a defence within the prescribed time. The Court also had to determine if it was in the interests of justice to set aside the judgment.

In its reasoning, the Court applied the principles established in *Australian Coal and Shale Industry Superannuation Pty Ltd v Thirlwell* and other relevant authorities concerning applications to set aside default judgments. The Court considered the applicant's affidavit evidence, which detailed the reasons for the delay in filing the defence, including alleged difficulties in obtaining instructions and engaging legal representation. The Court also examined the material filed by the applicant in support of its defence, assessing whether it disclosed a real prospect of success. The Court found that the applicant had not provided a sufficiently compelling explanation for its delay and that the defence, as presented, lacked sufficient merit to warrant setting aside the default judgment.

The Court ordered that the application to set aside the default judgment be dismissed.