Watt v Shepherd

Watt and another v Shepherd and another involved a dispute between the applicants and respondents over default judgments under the Federal Court Rules 2011. The applicants sought default judgment after the respondents defaulted in complying with court orders and failed to serve evidence. The respondents then applied for an extension of time to serve evidence and leave to amend their cross-claim. The legal issues included whether granting the extension and leave would delay the hearing, cause prejudice to the applicants, and whether it would achieve the overarching purpose of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). The court held that it was not in the interests of justice to grant the extension or leave to amend the cross-claim. The court found that the respondents' default and application for leave were not properly explained, and the amendments added new claims and parties to the cross-claim. The court also found that the subject of the amended claims was known to the respondents from the inception of the litigation. The court concluded that granting the extension and leave would delay the hearing and cause prejudice to the applicants. The court also found that granting the extension and leave would not achieve the overarching purpose of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). The court therefore dismissed the respondents' application and entered default judgment in favour of the applicants. The court also struck out the respondents' defence and dismissed their cross-claim. The court ordered the respondents to pay the applicants' costs of defending the interlocutory application. The applicants were required to file and serve written submissions identifying the bases on which they seek relief on their originating application, and any evidence in support, on or before 3 June 2021. The respondents were required to file and serve written submissions in reply, limited to 5 pages, and any evidence in reply on or before 17 June 2021. The matter was stood over to 25 June 2021.