Benefit Strategies Group Inc & Anor v Prider

(2005) 91 SASR 544; [2005] SASC 194

Supreme Court of South Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Private International Law
2. › Foreign judgments
3. › Enforcement at common law
4. › Default judgment of foreign court
5. › Defence of fraud
6. › Whether fraud must be fraud of party in whose favour judgment given
7. › Whether perjury by process server sufficient
1. Private International Law
2. › Foreign judgments
3. › Enforcement at common law
4. › Public policy
5. › Punitive damages
6. › Whether foreign judgment for punitive damages enforceable
7. › Whether award to private party constitutes penal judgment
1. Private International Law
2. › Foreign judgments
3. › Enforcement at common law
4. › Allegedly erroneous foreign judgment
5. › Whether merits of foreign judgment can be impeached
6. › Severability of foreign judgment
7. › Whether plaintiff may elect to enforce part only
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Summary judgment
3. › Immediate relief
4. › Supreme Court Rules 1987 (SA), r 25.02
5. › Onus of proof
6. › Whether defendant bears evidentiary onus to raise triable issue
7. › Whether appropriate to determine public policy defences on application for immediate relief

Quick Take

To resist enforcement of a foreign judgment on grounds of fraud, the fraud must be that of the party in whose favour the judgment was given; mere perjury by a process server or witness, without evidence linking it to the judgment creditor, is insufficient. A foreign judgment for punitive damages awarded to a private party in respect of private rights may be enforceable in Australia and is not necessarily contrary to public policy. A plaintiff may elect to enforce only part of a foreign judgment, and enforceable components of a foreign judgment may be severed from unenforceable components.