Liascos v Anastasopoulos and Hodges v Anastasopoulos

The applicants, Liascos and Hodges, sought to set aside a default judgment entered against them in favour of the respondent, Anastasopoulos. The dispute arose from a loan agreement where Anastasopoulos alleged that Liascos and Hodges had failed to repay the principal sum and interest. Anastasopoulos had commenced proceedings against Liascos and Hodges, and upon their failure to file a defence, obtained default judgment. The application to set aside this judgment was heard by Lloyd-Jones J in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the default judgment should be set aside. This required the Court to consider the principles governing applications to set aside default judgments, specifically whether there was a "real prospect of success" on the merits of the defence and whether there was a "good reason" for the judgment to be set aside. The applicants contended that they had a meritorious defence to the claim and that there were circumstances explaining their failure to file a defence within the prescribed time.

Lloyd-Jones J applied the well-established principles for setting aside default judgments. His Honour noted that a defendant seeking to set aside a default judgment must demonstrate either that the judgment was irregular or that there are grounds for setting it aside on the merits. In this instance, the judgment was regular. Therefore, the focus shifted to whether the applicants had shown a defence with a real prospect of success and a good reason for their failure to file a defence. His Honour found that the evidence presented by the applicants did not establish a defence with a real prospect of success, nor did it provide a sufficient explanation for their delay.

Consequently, Lloyd-Jones J dismissed the application to set aside the default judgment.