Floth Pty Ltd v Ana Marie Gabila Bulseco

Floth Pty Ltd, the plaintiff, brought an action against Ana Marie Gabila Bulseco, the defendant, in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. The plaintiff sought the return of a leased excavator and payment of outstanding amounts. The primary dispute centred on whether the court had jurisdiction over the defendant and whether the originating process was correctly served. The plaintiff initially attempted to serve the originating process by substituted service when the defendant was outside Australia. However, the proceedings were later formally commenced by a statement of claim when the defendant was in Australia.

The court was required to determine if the exception to personal service by substituted service, as outlined in Laurie v Carroll, applied in this case. It also had to consider whether the irregularity of the initial commencement by motion affected the validity of the service. Furthermore, the court needed to decide if substituted service was permissible under the extraterritorial jurisdiction provisions in the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).

The court held that the statement of claim was deemed to have been properly served despite the initial irregularity. The court found that the exception to personal service in Laurie v Carroll was applicable, allowing substituted service. Consequently, the court had jurisdiction over the defendant. The court further ruled that the plaintiff was required to elect between obtaining a default judgment for the liquidated sum claimed or a default judgment for the damages to be assessed.

The court ordered that the plaintiff must elect between the two options for judgment, and it directed the parties on the procedures to follow to make this election.