Croker v Ewen; Croker v Challoner

[2000] NSWCA 186

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Address for service
3. › Requirements under Part 9 rule 6
4. › Whether post office address constitutes valid address for service
5. › Whether documents may be 'left' at post office during ordinary business hours
6. › Supreme Court Rules, Pt 9 r 6
1. Appeal
2. › Extension of time
3. › Prospects of success on appeal
4. › Decision below unarguably correct
5. › Grounds of appeal unintelligible
6. › Extension of time refused
7. › Notice of appeal struck out

Quick Take

A post office address, including a poste restante arrangement, does not constitute a valid address for service under Part 9 rule 6 of the Supreme Court Rules because it does not permit documents to be left for a person at the address during ordinary business hours. Privacy and unsubstantiated safety concerns do not justify dispensation from compliance.