Glendalough Holdings Pty Ltd v Summit Chemicals Pty Ltd

Glendalough Holdings Pty Ltd commenced proceedings against Summit Chemicals Pty Ltd, alleging loss and damage arising from defective gun rovings supplied by Summit. Summit, in turn, sought to issue a third party notice to Vetrotex Espana SA, alleging that Vetrotex was liable for the defects and should indemnify Summit. The central issue in the case was whether the Supreme Court of Western Australia had jurisdiction to permit service of the third party notice on Vetrotex Espana SA, which is a foreign entity. The court had to determine if the grounds for service out of jurisdiction, as outlined in Order 10 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, were sufficiently substantiated.

The court examined the various grounds for long-arm jurisdiction and found that none of them were adequately supported by the evidence. The contracts in question were made outside Western Australia, and there was no evidence to suggest that Vetrotex Espana SA traded or resided in Western Australia. Furthermore, the claims in tort, such as misrepresentation and failure to warn, did not establish a serious issue to be tried, as required for invoking the long-arm jurisdiction. The court concluded that Summit had not demonstrated a good arguable case for the proposed third party notice, and therefore, the orders for service out of jurisdiction were set aside.

In summary, the Supreme Court of Western Australia held that it did not have jurisdiction to permit service of the third party notice on Vetrotex Espana SA. The court discharged the orders made by Master Sanderson on 28 June 2002 and 29 August 2002, which had granted leave for the defendants to effect service of a third party notice on Vetrotex Espana SA.