Icon Water Limited v Preston

Icon Water Limited filed an application for default judgment against Ms Preston, which was subsequently entered by the tribunal on 18 October 2018. Ms Preston did not respond to the application and was subsequently served with the default judgment. She then sought to have the default judgment set aside, claiming she had not received the application documents and had been unwell. Despite multiple opportunities, Ms Preston did not attend the scheduled hearings and her applications were dismissed.

The primary legal issue before the tribunal was whether the default judgment should be set aside based on Ms Preston's claims of not receiving the application documents and her period of ill health. The tribunal needed to assess whether there were grounds for setting aside the default judgment under the relevant legislation and rules.

The tribunal considered Ms Preston's submissions and the procedural history of the case. It was noted that Ms Preston had multiple opportunities to attend the hearings and provide reasons for her non-attendance and failure to respond to the initial application. The tribunal concluded that Ms Preston had not provided sufficient grounds for setting aside the default judgment, and therefore, the default judgment remained in place.

The tribunal dismissed Ms Preston's applications to set aside the default judgment, thereby confirming the default judgment entered on 18 October 2018.