Legal Research
Cases
Okere v E'Co Australia Pty Ltd

Okere v E'Co Australia Pty Ltd

Case [2025] WADC 71 8 October 2025

Jurisdiction

Procedural Fairness

Miscarriage of Justice

Default Judgment

Civil Litigation & Procedure

Type to search within this case.

JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CIVIL

LOCATION:   PERTH
CITATION:   OKERE -v- E'CO AUSTRALIA PTY LTD [2025] WADC 71
CORAM:   JEYAMOHAN DCJ
HEARD:   2 SEPTEMBER 2025
DELIVERED          :   8 OCTOBER 2025
FILE NO/S:   APP 26 of 2025
BETWEEN:   CHINEDU NNANNA OKERE
Appellant
AND
E'CO AUSTRALIA PTY LTD
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :   MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   MAGISTRATE DARGE
File Number            :   PER/GCLM/3175/2023

Catchwords:

Magistrates Court appeal - Denial of procedural fairness - Application to set aside default judgment on condition of payment into court - Miscarriage of justice - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

District Court Rules 2005 (WA), r 50, r 51
Magistrates Court (Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 (WA), s 40

Result:

Appeal allowed
Application remitted to the Magistrates Court to be tried before a different magistrate

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	Mr D Siaw
Respondent	:	Mr P Lafferty

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	Hoe Lawyers
Respondent	:	Simon Keay

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

ACN 076 676 438 Pty Ltd (in liq) v A‑Comms Teledata Pty Ltd [2000] WASC 214
Allegro Pty Ltd v Famicorp Pty Ltd (Unreported, WASC, Library No 930313, 14 May 1993)
Batiste v Gilmour-Latham [2001] NSWCA 392
Brocklehurst v Wolinski [2015] WADC 36
Carrier Air Conditioning Pty Ltd v Richard Kevin Thommesen and Rachael Anne Thommesen as Trustees for the Thommesen Family Trust [2005] WADC 195
Defendi v Szigligeti [2019] WASCA 115
Fleming v Duneda Pty Ltd [2000] WADC 17
Frigger v Frigger [2023] WASCA 103
Glew v Frank Jasper Pty Ltd [2010] WASCA 87
Hall v Hall [2007] WASC 198
Hazart Pty Ltd v Rademaker (1993) 11 WAR 26
Johnston v Morien [2006] WADC 46
La Trobe Financial Asset Management Ltd v Wallabie Constructions Pty Ltd [2024] WASC 482
McDiarmid v Rycar Pty Ltd [2006] WADC 39
Moleirinho v Talbot & Olivier Lawyers Pty Ltd [2014] WASCA 65
National Australia Bank Ltd v Watkins [2024] WASC 30
Neil v Nott [1994] HCA 23; (1994) 68 ALJR 509; (1994) 121 ALR 148
Nobarani v Mariconte [2018] HCA 36
Parker v Transfield Pty Ltd [2000] WASCA 382
Sethi v Bhavsar [2020] WASCA 52
Stanley v Layne Christensen Company [2006] WASCA 56
Starrs v Retravision (WA) Ltd [2012] WASCA 67
Ward v West Coast Suzuki Marine Pty Ltd [2021] WADC 37
Wentworth v Rogers (No 5) (1986) 6 NSWLR 534
West v Wood [2002] WADC 245
Woodley v Woodley [2018] WASCA 149
Zerjavic v Chevron Australia Pty Ltd [2020] WASCA 40

JEYAMOHAN DCJ:

Introduction

On 13 March 2023, E'Co Australia Pty Ltd (E'Co) commenced proceedings against Chinedu Nnanna Okere (Mr Okere) in the Magistrates Court claiming damages of $45,416.41 in respect of wrongful conversion of certain goods the property of E'Co.[1]
[1] Magistrates Court lower court file General Procedure Claim 3175/2023 (MB), page 1.
On 2 May 2023, E'Co applied for default judgment on the basis that Mr Okere had not lodged, within the prescribed time, a response to claim.
On 19 July 2023, the E'Co obtained default judgment against…

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.

Continue reading Okere v E'Co Australia Pty Ltd

Details

AGLC: Okere v E'Co Australia Pty Ltd [2025] WADC 71
Case: [2025] WADC 71
Decision Date: 8 OCTOBER 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Magistrates Court of Victoria, Okere pursued an appeal against E'Co Australia Pty Ltd, arising from a default judgment in a personal injury action. Okere contended that the court had denied procedural fairness, seeking to set aside the judgment on the condition of payment into court, arguing that the default judgment resulted in a miscarriage of justice. The court was tasked with determining whether the procedural irregularities warranted setting aside the judgment and if the payment into court could secure the applicant's right to a fair hearing. The court examined the specific circumstances surrounding the default judgment and the conditions under which the payment into court was made.

The court's primary legal issues involved whether Okere's right to procedural fairness was breached and if the procedural irregularities were substantial enough to warrant setting aside the default judgment. Additionally, the court considered whether the applicant's payment into court satisfied the conditions required to set aside the judgment. The court's analysis hinged on the principles of procedural fairness and the discretion granted to the court to set aside a default judgment in the interests of justice.

The court held that Okere had not been afforded procedural fairness, and the procedural irregularities were significant enough to warrant setting aside the default judgment. The court found that the applicant's payment into court satisfied the conditions required to address the miscarriage of justice. The court emphasised that the circumstances of each case would determine whether setting aside a default judgment was appropriate and that the payment into court was a crucial factor in this decision. The court concluded that the procedural fairness had been compromised and granted the application to set aside the default judgment on the condition that Okere paid the amount into court. The final orders included the setting aside of the default judgment and the reinstatement of the proceedings on the condition that Okere paid the amount into court.

Orders