Ralph Lauren 57 Pty Ltd v Puritan Australia
[2012] QCAT 495
•18 July 2012
| CITATION: | Ralph Lauren 57 Pty Ltd v Puritan Australia [2012] QCAT 495 |
| PARTIES: | Ralph Lauren 57 Pty Ltd at Ralph Lauren Unit Trust (Applicant) |
| v | |
| Puritan Australia (Respondent) |
| APPLICATION NUMBER: | MCDO746-12 |
| MATTER TYPE: | Other minor civil dispute matters |
| HEARING DATE: | 12 June 2012 |
| HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
| DECISION OF: | Andrew McLean Williams, Member |
| DELIVERED ON: | 18 July 2012 |
| DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
| ORDERS MADE: | Application for extension of time is dismissed. |
| CATCHWORDS: | Insufficient basis to extend period for service |
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act).
REASONS FOR DECISION
On 12 June 2012 I dismissed the Applicant’s Application for extension of time within which to serve their originating application. This application had been made to QCAT on 7 June 2012.
The matter was determined on the papers with no reasons then having been given.
The application to extend time for service of the originating application that was filed by the Applicant specifies the following as the reasons why the Applicant failed to serve the Respondent with a copy of the originating application within 28 days:
We tried to arrange a time to meet with the Respondent to serve the papers. We had arranged to meet on Sunday 22/04/2012, however I was unable to meet her. I had not taken into account the 28 day time frame and eventually ran out of time.
In seeking to have the 28 day period for service extended, the Applicant is seeking an indulgence from the Tribunal. As part of that, the Applicant must show grounds why it was not possible for them to serve the Respondent within the 28 day period allowed for service.
The Applicant has not demonstrated that it was impossible to serve the Respondent within 28 days. Rather, the Applicant has revealed that they did not properly familiarise themselves with the time limits for service. It is beholden upon all Applicants who wish to use QCAT to recover debts by means of QCAT to properly familiarise themselves with the service requirements. Having failed to serve the Respondent within the 28 day period because of their own failure to properly acquaint themselves with the requirements for service, the Applicants have also failed to show any good reason why the discretion to extend the period for service should now be exercised in their favour. The Applicant remains at liberty to commence a fresh application against the Respondent, if they are so minded.
0
0
0