The Court dismissed an application for default judgment against corporate defendants on two grounds: first, service of the statement of claim by post to the street address of the building without specifying the suite or shop number recorded as the registered office on ASIC extracts did not constitute valid service under s 109X(1)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) or r 10.22 of the UCPR. Second, a claim for damages for misleading or deceptive conduct under the Australian Consumer Law is not a claim for a 'debt or liquidated claim' within the meaning of UCPR r 16.6(1), even where the loss is quantified as specific payments made by the plaintiffs.
The full text is available to signed-in members.