KV Projects Pty Ltd v Regal Bridges Pty Ltd - [2020] QDC 261

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

KV Projects Pty Ltd v Regal Bridges Pty Ltd and Ors [2020] QDC 261

PARTIES:

KV PROJECTS PTY LTD ACN 623 423 138

(plaintiff)

v

REGAL BRIDGES PTY LTD ACN 615 989 494

(first defendant)

ANDREW MICHAEL CARR

(second defendant)

JOSHUA ODIN STUART DEEM

(third defendant)

FILE NO/S:

D32/2020

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application

DELIVERED ON:

16 October 2020

DELIVERED AT:

Maroochydore

HEARING DATE:

Decided on papers without oral hearing

JUDGE:

Cash QC DCJ

ORDERS:

1)   Personal service of the claim and statement of claim filed in this proceeding on 25 February 2020 on the second defendant is dispensed with.

2)   Pursuant to rule 116 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) the claim and statement of claim filed in this proceeding on 25 February 2020 be served on the second defendant by:

a)   Sending the claim and statement of claim to 32 Kunde Street, Nundah, Qld 4012 by pre-paid post;

b)     Sending a message from the website
i)   Containing a link to a digital version of the claim and statement of claim;

ii)     Advising the second defendant that the claim and statement of claim has been posted to 32 Kunde Street, Nundah, Qld 4012;

c)   Sending the claim and statement of claim to the registered offices of Regal Bridges Pty Ltd with directions to the accountant to forward to the director Andrew Carr.

3)   Pursuant to rule 116(3) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) service be deemed to be effected after four (4) business days after the last day on which the plaintiff serves the second defendant in accordance with the above methods.

4)   The costs of the application be reserved.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – SERVICE – IN LIEU OF PERSONAL SERVICE: SUBSTITUTED AND INFORMAL SERVICE

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 116, r 430, r 508

A-G v Watego [2003] QSC 367

Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Limited v Wilkin & Anor [2018] QDC 16

COUNSEL:

No appearance. Decided on papers without oral hearing.

SOLICITORS:

Stonegate Legal for the plaintiff

No appearance for the second defendant

This is an application for substituted service. The background to the application is a little unusual. In February 2020 the plaintiff, KV Projects Pty Ltd, commenced these proceedings by claim. The first defendant named in the claim is Regal Bridges Pty Ltd. The second defendant is named as Andrew Michael Carr and the third Joshua Odin Stuart Deem. The claim is for damages on a number of bases all relying upon what are alleged to be fraudulent misrepresentations for which the defendants are responsible.

The claim was properly served upon the first defendant and in the absence of a notice of intention to defend the plaintiff secured default judgment against the first defendant on 11 May 2020. On 30 April 2020 the third defendant was personally served with the claim and on 3 June 2020 the plaintiff secured default judgment against the third defendant.

On 28 August…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read KV Projects Pty Ltd v Regal Bridges Pty Ltd 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: [2020] QDC 261
Decision Date: 16 October 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of KV Projects Pty Ltd v Regal Bridges Pty Ltd involved the plaintiff, KV Projects Pty Ltd, seeking service of its claim and statement of claim against the second defendant, Regal Bridges Pty Ltd, in the context of civil proceedings in Queensland. The plaintiff aimed to dispense with the requirement of personal service and instead sought permission to serve the claim and statement of claim by alternative methods. The dispute arose out of a contractual issue between the parties, although the specific details of the contract were not elaborated upon in the text.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiff could legally serve the claim and statement of claim through alternative methods as outlined in the application, specifically pursuant to rule 116 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld). This rule allows for substituted service when personal service is not feasible. The court had to determine whether the proposed methods of service, which included sending documents by pre-paid post, sending a message through the defendant’s website, and directing service to the company's registered offices with instructions to forward to the director, were acceptable under the circumstances.

The court examined the circumstances of the case and concluded that the proposed methods of service were appropriate under the circumstances. The court found that the methods specified in the application were reasonable and would effectively notify the defendant of the proceedings. The court emphasised that the methods were designed to ensure that the defendant received the claim and statement of claim in a timely manner, considering the defendant’s location and the availability of the director. The court granted the application, allowing the plaintiff to serve the documents as specified, and also ordered that the costs of the application be reserved for later determination.

Orders

Orders of the court

1) Personal service of the claim and statement of claim filed in this proceeding on 25 February 2020 on the second defendant is dispensed with.

2) Pursuant to rule 116 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) the claim and statement of claim filed in this proceeding on 25 February 2020 be served on the second defendant by:

a) Sending the claim and statement of claim to 32 Kunde Street, Nundah, Qld 4012 by pre-paid post;

b) Sending a message from the website https://regalbridges.com/:

i) Containing a link to a digital version of the claim and statement of claim;

ii) Advising the second defendant that the claim and statement of claim has been posted to 32 Kunde Street, Nundah, Qld 4012;

c) Sending the claim and statement of claim to the registered offices of Regal Bridges Pty Ltd with directions to the accountant to forward to the director Andrew Carr.

3) Pursuant to rule 116(3) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) service be deemed to be effected after four (4) business days after the last day on which the plaintiff serves the second defendant in accordance with the above methods.

4) The costs of the application be reserved.

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.

CITATION:	KV Projects Pty Ltd v Regal Bridges Pty Ltd and Ors [2020] QDC 261
PARTIES:	KV PROJECTS PTY LTD ACN 623 423 138 (plaintiff)
v
REGAL BRIDGES PTY LTD ACN 615 989 494 (first defendant)
ANDREW MICHAEL CARR (second defendant)
JOSHUA ODIN STUART DEEM (third defendant)
FILE NO/S:	D32/2020
DIVISION:	Civil
PROCEEDING:	Application
DELIVERED ON:	16 October 2020
DELIVERED AT:	Maroochydore
HEARING DATE:	Decided on papers without oral hearing
JUDGE:	Cash QC DCJ
ORDERS:	1) Personal service of the claim and statement of claim filed in this proceeding on 25 February 2020 on the second defendant is dispensed with. 2) *Pursuant to rule 116 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules* 1999 (Qld) the claim and statement of claim filed in this proceeding on 25 February 2020 be served on the second defendant by: a) Sending the claim and statement of claim to 32 Kunde Street, Nundah, Qld 4012 by pre-paid post; b) Sending a message from the website i) Containing a link to a digital version of the claim and statement of claim; ii) Advising the second defendant that the claim and statement of claim has been posted to 32 Kunde Street, Nundah, Qld 4012; c) Sending the claim and statement of claim to the registered offices of Regal Bridges Pty Ltd with directions to the accountant to forward to the director Andrew Carr.** 3) Pursuant to rule 116(3) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) service be deemed to be effected after four (4) business days after the last day on which the plaintiff serves the second defendant in accordance with the above methods. 4) The costs of the application be reserved.
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – SERVICE – IN LIEU OF PERSONAL SERVICE: SUBSTITUTED AND INFORMAL SERVICE Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 116, r 430, r 508 A-G v Watego [2003] QSC 367 Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Limited v Wilkin & Anor [2018] QDC 16
COUNSEL:	No appearance. Decided on papers without oral hearing.
SOLICITORS:	Stonegate Legal for the plaintiff No appearance for the second defendant