Suncorp Metway Ltd v Agnew

The matter of Suncorp Metway Ltd v Agnew involved the applicant seeking substituted service on the respondent, Wayne Forrest Agnew, after multiple failed attempts at personal service. The dispute was brought before the Queensland Supreme Court, which was required to determine whether the court should allow substituted service in lieu of personal service. The applicant had attempted personal service on ten separate occasions, each without success, and thus sought an order for substituted service under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (UCPR). The court examined the statutory provisions and case law regarding substituted service and the reasons for the repeated failure to effect personal service. It noted that the respondent had provided an address and email address, which the applicant could reasonably use to serve the documents. The court concluded that the failure to serve the documents personally was not due to any fault of the applicant and that substituted service was warranted under the circumstances.

The court found that the statutory requirements for personal service could be dispensed with and ordered that the documents be served by posting and emailing them to the respondent. The court reasoned that the respondent had provided contact details that were sufficient for the purpose of service, and there was no evidence suggesting that the respondent was evading service. The court also noted that the costs of the application should be borne by the applicant, as the failure to serve was not due to any fault on their part. The court’s decision was based on the provisions of the UCPR and relevant case law, which support the use of substituted service in appropriate circumstances. The court granted the application for substituted service and ordered that the costs of the application be the applicant’s costs in the proceeding.