Wong v Jani-King Franchising, Inc

Wong appealed against a judgment of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, which had dismissed his application to set aside a default judgment obtained against him by Jani-King Franchising, Inc. The judgment was based on a prior judgment given by a Texas court. The primary judge found that Wong had submitted to the jurisdiction of the Texas court by appearing in the proceedings and taking steps to participate while reserving his right to challenge the court’s jurisdiction. Wong argued that the Texas judgment was not registrable under Part 2 of the Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth) and that the Federal Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to enforce the judgment.

The court considered whether Wong had submitted to the jurisdiction of the Texas court by his conduct in the proceedings. The court found that Wong had taken various steps in the Texas proceedings, including opposing the joinder of an additional defendant on the basis that it would delay the trial, which demonstrated his submission to the jurisdiction of the Texas court. The court also considered whether section 11 of the Foreign Judgments Act applied, but found that it did not. The court concluded that Wong could not make out a defence that the Dallas court lacked jurisdiction. The court also found that Wong's application to adduce fresh evidence was not successful.

The appeal was dismissed with costs. The court found that the primary judge's decision was correct and that there were no errors of law. The court also found that the fresh evidence sought to be adduced by Wong was not relevant to the issue of jurisdiction and would not have affected the outcome of the case.