Petrou v Vassiliadis

The applicants, Petrou and Vassiliadis, sought to set aside an undefended judgment entered against them in favour of the first respondent. The primary judge had refused their application to set aside the judgment, and the applicants sought leave to appeal this refusal to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge had erred in describing the principles for setting aside an undefended judgment under rule 36.16(2)(b) of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 (Vic), and whether the primary judge had erred in taking into account or giving inappropriate weight to the medical evidence provided as an explanation for the applicants' non-attendance at the hearing.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Stern and Free JJA, found that the primary judge had not erred in either respect. Their Honours considered the transcript of the hearing as a whole and concluded that the primary judge had correctly articulated the principles governing the setting aside of undefended judgments. Furthermore, the Court found no error in the primary judge's assessment and weighting of the medical evidence presented to explain the applicants' absence.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal made orders refusing leave to appeal and ordering the applicants to pay the costs of the first respondent.