Hooke v Bux Global Limited (No 7)

Link copied
Case Copied 5 min read

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Hooke v Bux Global Limited (No 7) [2018] FCA 2065

File number: WAD 644 of 2017
Judge: COLVIN J
Date of judgment: 13 December 2018
Date of publication of reasons: 18 December 2018
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - application for substituted service - failed attempt to effect personal service - application allowed
Cases cited:

Commissioner of Taxation v Caratti (No 2) [2018] FCA 1500

Hooke v Bux Global Limited(No 6) [2018] FCA 1545

Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Registry: Western Australia
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Corporations and Corporate Insolvency
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 12
Counsel for the Plaintiffs: Ms C Spencer
Solicitor for the Plaintiffs: Tottle Partners
Counsel for the Defendant: The Defendant did not appear

ORDERS

WAD 644 of 2017
BETWEEN:

PETER JAMES HOOKE & CLAIRE ELIZABETH HOOKE

First Plaintiff

PETER JAMES HOOKE & BRICE JAMES HOOKE AS TRUSTEES FOR THE HOOKE SUPERANNUATION FUND

Second Plaintiff

JOHN CORRAN CRAWFORD

Third Plaintiff

AND:

BUX GLOBAL LIMITED (ACN 613 313 616)

Defendant

JUDGE:

COLVIN J

DATE OF ORDER:

13 DECEMBER 2018

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Personal service of the following documents on Raymond Webber and Christopher Webber be dispensed with:

(a)the plaintiffs' interlocutory application dated 24 October 2018;

(b)the affidavit of Caroline Cecilie Spencer sworn 23 October 2018; and

(c)the plaintiffs' submissions in support of costs orders dated 24 October 2018;

(together, the 'Documents').

2.Copies of the Documents and a copy of these orders be served on Raymond Webber by:

(a)emailing them to raymond.webber@shampagneaustralia.com; and

(b)emailing them to Andrew Webber at andrew.webber@shampagneaustralia.com and asking Andrew Webber to bring them to the attention of Raymond Webber as soon as possible.

3.Copies of the Documents and a copy of these orders be served on Christopher Webber by:

(a)emailing them to chris.webber@shampagneaustralia.com; and

(b)emailing them to Andrew Webber at Andrew.webber@shampagneaustralia.com and asking Andrew Webber to bring them to the attention of Christopher Webber as soon as possible.

4.The hearing of the plaintiffs' interlocutory application be listed at 9.15 am on 22 January 2019.

Note:    Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

COLVIN J:

  1. On 11 October 2018 I made orders winding up Bux Global Limited on just and equitable grounds:  Hooke v Bux Global Limited(No 6) [2018] FCA 1545. The plaintiffs now seek orders for indemnity costs in the fixed amount of $535,016 and further seek orders that each of Raymond Webber, Andrew Webber and Christopher Webber (each of who was not a party to the winding‑up application) be jointly and severally liable for the payment of those costs.

  2. The costs application has been personally served on Mr Andrew Webber.  On 13 December 2018 I made orders on the ex parte application of the plaintiffs dispensing with personal service on each of Mr Raymond Webber and Mr Christopher Webber of the costs application, the affidavit in support and the plaintiffs' submissions (Documents) and that…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Hooke v Bux Global Limited (No 7) and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2018] FCA 2065
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in this case were Hooke and Bux Global Limited. The dispute related to an application for substituted service, as the plaintiffs had been unable to effect personal service on the defendants. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The plaintiffs sought substituted service of certain documents, arguing that they had made diligent efforts to locate and serve the defendants but had been unsuccessful.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiffs had made sufficient efforts to effect personal service on the defendants before applying for substituted service. The court had to determine if the plaintiffs' attempts to locate and serve the defendants were sufficient under the relevant legal provisions. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the proposed method of substituted service, via email, was appropriate and likely to ensure that the defendants would be effectively notified of the legal proceedings.

The court found that the plaintiffs had indeed made diligent efforts to locate and serve the defendants personally. Given the failed attempts at personal service, the court allowed the application for substituted service. The court reasoned that the plaintiffs' attempts to locate the defendants were reasonable and thorough. Furthermore, the proposed method of substituted service through email was deemed appropriate, as it was likely to bring the documents to the defendants' attention effectively. The court was satisfied that the defendants would be served with the necessary documents in a timely manner.

The court ordered that personal service of the specified documents be dispensed with and that substituted service be effected by emailing the documents to the defendants' email addresses and to a related party, Andrew Webber, with instructions to bring the documents to the defendants' attention. The hearing of the interlocutory application was scheduled for a future date. The court's decision was based on the Federal Court Rules 2011, specifically Rule 39.32, which governs the entry of orders.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Personal service of the following documents on Raymond Webber and Christopher Webber be dispensed with:

(a) the plaintiffs' interlocutory application dated 24 October 2018;

(b) the affidavit of Caroline Cecilie Spencer sworn 23 October 2018; and

(c) the plaintiffs' submissions in support of costs orders dated 24 October 2018;

(together, the 'Documents').

2. Copies of the Documents and a copy of these orders be served on Raymond Webber by:

(a) emailing them to raymond.webber@shampagneaustralia.com; and

(b) emailing them to Andrew Webber at andrew.webber@shampagneaustralia.com and asking Andrew Webber to bring them to the attention of Raymond Webber as soon as possible.

3. Copies of the Documents and a copy of these orders be served on Christopher Webber by:

(a) emailing them to chris.webber@shampagneaustralia.com; and

(b) emailing them to Andrew Webber at Andrew.webber@shampagneaustralia.com and asking Andrew Webber to bring them to the attention of Christopher Webber as soon as possible.

4. The hearing of the plaintiffs' interlocutory application be listed at 9.15 am on 22 January 2019.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.