Jon Simikic and Alfred Axisa v RLC Investments Pty Ltd

In the matter of *Jon Simikic and Alfred Axisa v RLC Investments Pty Ltd*, heard before Vija Zars in the Supreme Court of Victoria, the applicants, Jon Simikic and Alfred Axisa, sought to set aside a default judgment entered against them by the respondent, RLC Investments Pty Ltd. The dispute arose from an alleged breach of a loan agreement, with RLC Investments Pty Ltd having obtained default judgment due to the applicants' failure to file a defence within the prescribed time.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicants had established sufficient grounds to warrant setting aside the default judgment. This required the Court to consider whether the applicants had a meritorious defence to the claim and whether they had provided a satisfactory explanation for their failure to file a defence in a timely manner. The Court also had to assess whether it was in the interests of justice to set aside the judgment, balancing the applicants' right to have their defence heard against the respondent's right to enforce its judgment.

Her Honour Vija Zars applied the principles established in *Colgate-Palmolive Company v. Cussons Pty Ltd* and *Meek v. Wilson*, which require a party seeking to set aside a default judgment to demonstrate both a defence on the merits and an acceptable explanation for the delay. In this instance, the Court found that while the applicants had raised arguable defences, their explanation for failing to file a defence was insufficient and lacked candour. Consequently, the Court concluded that it was not in the interests of justice to set aside the default judgment.

The Court ordered that the application to set aside the default judgment be dismissed.