Ennis v Credit Union Australia

In *Ennis v Credit Union Australia*, the applicant, Ms Ennis, sought to set aside a default judgment entered against her by the respondent, Credit Union Australia (CUA), in proceedings concerning a loan agreement. The dispute centred on whether CUA had properly served the originating process on Ms Ennis, thereby giving the court jurisdiction to enter judgment against her.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the service of the originating process on Ms Ennis was effective in accordance with the relevant rules of court. This involved determining whether CUA had taken all reasonable steps to bring the originating process to Ms Ennis's attention, particularly given that she was residing overseas at the time of the purported service.

Judge Jarrett found that CUA had failed to demonstrate that it had effected proper service. The court noted that while CUA had attempted service by post to Ms Ennis's last known address in Australia, it had not taken any steps to ascertain her overseas address or to serve her in accordance with the rules governing service out of the jurisdiction. Consequently, the court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to enter the default judgment.

The court ordered that the default judgment entered against Ms Ennis be set aside.