Ghosh v Ninemsn Pty Limited

In *Ghosh v Ninemsn Pty Limited*, the appellant, Dr Ratna Ghosh, sought to appeal a decision of the primary judge. The respondents, Ninemsn Pty Limited and others, had filed a notice of motion seeking to dismiss the appeal. The Court of Appeal of New South Wales was required to determine whether the appellant had complied with the procedural requirements for filing a notice of appearance, particularly in circumstances where formal service had not yet been effected but the appellant had actively participated in directions hearings.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the appellant's active participation in directions hearings constituted an "appearance" for the purposes of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, thereby requiring a formal notice of appearance to be filed. The Court considered the interplay between the rules governing service and the rules governing appearances, and the consequences of failing to file a formal notice of appearance when actively engaging with the court process.

The Court reasoned that active participation in directions hearings, without filing a formal notice of appearance, did not satisfy the requirements of Rule 6.1 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005. The Court emphasised that a formal notice of appearance is a distinct procedural step required to signify a party's intention to defend proceedings, even if they have otherwise engaged with the court. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appellant's notice of motion and ordered the appellant to pay the respondents' costs of the appearance on that motion. The Court also directed the respondents to file and serve their notices of appearance within a specified timeframe.