Zepinic v Chateau Constructions (Australia) Ltd

In *Zepinic v Chateau Constructions (Australia) Ltd*, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered an appeal concerning the sufficiency of service of a notice of motion. The appellant, Mr Zepinic, sought to set aside a default judgment entered against him by the respondent, Chateau Constructions (Australia) Ltd. The central issue was whether service of the notice of motion by post, in accordance with rule 10.6(2) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), constituted effective service for the purpose of setting aside the default judgment.

The Court was required to determine whether the service of the notice of motion by post was a valid method of service under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, particularly in the context of setting aside a default judgment. This involved an interpretation of rule 10.6(2) and its application to the procedural requirements for challenging a court order.

McColl JA held that service of a notice of motion by post, as permitted by rule 10.6(2), was sufficient for the purpose of initiating proceedings to set aside a default judgment. The Court reasoned that the rule provided a general method of service and did not contain any specific exclusions for applications to set aside judgments. Therefore, the appellant's attempt to serve the notice of motion by post was a valid exercise of the court's procedural rules. The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the primary judge for determination of the application to set aside the default judgment.