Hamilton v Meta Platforms, Inc (Service out of Jurisdiction)

The case of Hamilton v Meta Platforms, Inc (Service out of Jurisdiction) involved an ex parte application for leave to serve the respondents, Facebook and Google, in the United States of America. The applicant, Mr Hamilton, sought to serve the respondents with Court documents in relation to representative proceedings which included claims for relief in respect of alleged contraventions of provisions in Part IV of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth). The legal issues before the court were whether Mr Hamilton had satisfied the requirements of rules 10.43(3) and 10.44(2) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) to be granted leave to serve out of jurisdiction, and whether substituted service by email should be permitted.

The court found that Mr Hamilton had satisfied the requirements for leave to serve out of jurisdiction, based on the evidence presented and the principles of international comity. The court concluded that it was appropriate to grant leave to serve the respondents in the United States in accordance with article 10(a) of the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters. However, the court dismissed the application for substituted service by email as there was no evidence filed as to the practicality of serving the respondents in accordance with the Rules.

The court's decision was based on the applicant's evidence, which included affidavits and documentary tenders. The court noted that the hearsay rule did not apply in an interlocutory proceeding, as per section 75 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth). The court also considered the relevant rules and authorities, including the requirement for an order granting leave to serve outside Australia before considering substituted service.

In conclusion, the court granted leave to serve the Court Documents on Facebook and Google in the United States in accordance with article 10(a) of the Hague Convention. The court did not make orders for substituted service by email, as the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate the practicality of such service. The orders made by the court are as follows: "1. Pursuant to rr 10.42, 10.43(2) and 10.44(1) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), the applicant be granted leave to serve the Court Documents on the respondents in the United States of America in accordance with article 10(a) of the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters opened for signature 15 November 1965, 658 UNTS 163 (entered into force 10 February 1969)."