Djunaedi v Collins

In the case of Djunaedi v Collins, the applicants sought to set aside orders made by a Registrar for substituted service of a bankruptcy notice on the alleged debtor, Mr Collins. The dispute arose from an ex parte application, and the central legal issues were whether the applicants' solicitors had complied with their disclosure obligations, whether there had been a breach of the Harman Undertaking, and whether the substituted service orders should be set aside.

The court held that the applicants' solicitors had deliberately ignored their duty of disclosure on the ex parte application regarding the issue of service and whether Mr Collins' solicitors had instructions to accept service. The court found that there had been a deliberate breach of the Harman Undertaking concerning the information about Mr Collins' whereabouts, specifically that he was in prison. The applicants' failure to bring the alleged breach of the Harman Undertaking to the Registrar's attention prior to the making of the Substituted Service Orders was deemed a further breach of the duty of disclosure. Consequently, the court ordered the substituted service orders to be set aside.

The court's reasoning hinged on the obligation of full disclosure by the applicants in ex parte proceedings, including making proper inquiries about all relevant facts prior to any ex parte hearing. The court emphasised that failure to make such disclosure ordinarily warrants the discharge of any order made ex parte, as it is crucial for the administration of justice that the court has full information before making such orders. The deliberate breaches of disclosure obligations and the Harman Undertaking led to the conclusion that the substituted service orders should be set aside.