FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Singh v New Zealand Breweries Ltd [2010] FCA 850 Citation: Singh v New Zealand Breweries Ltd [2010] FCA 850 Appeal from: New Zealand Breweries Ltd v Singh [2010] FMCA 260 Parties: JUGESHINDER SINGH v NEW ZEALAND BREWERIES LTD File number(s): NSD 473 of 2010 Judge: EMMETT J Date of judgment: 21 July 2010 Date of hearing: 21 July 2010 Place: Sydney Division: GENERAL DIVISION Category: No catchwords Number of paragraphs: 5 Counsel for the Appellant: No appearance Counsel for the Respondent: J. K. Taylor Solicitor for the Respondent: Mallesons Stephen Jacques IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION NSD 473 of 2010 ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA BETWEEN: JUGESHINDER SINGH Appellant AND: NEW ZEALAND BREWERIES LTD Respondent JUDGE: EMMETT J DATE OF ORDER: 21 july 2010 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal. Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court's website. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION NSD 473 of 2010 ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA BETWEEN: jugeshinder singh Appellant AND: NEW ZEALAND BREWERIES LTD Respondent JUDGE: EMMETT J DATE: 21 JULY 2010 PLACE: SYDNEY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This proceeding is an appeal from orders of the Federal Magistrates Court. A notice of appeal was filed on 4 May 2010. When the matter was called over today, there was no appearance for the appellant. In those circumstances, the respondent asks that the appeal be dismissed. The respondent wrote to the appellant on 16 July 2010 outlining a string of defaults on the part of the appellant. The notice of appeal was not served on the respondent by the appellant within 21 days of the date on which the judgment appealed from was pronounced, in contravention of O 52 r 15(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules. 2 The appellant failed to notify the respondent of the appointment made for settling the index on 8 June 2010. The respondent was represented at the appointment and it was only at that time that the appellant served the respondent with notice of the appeal. No draft index had been prepared and the Deputy Registrar adjourned the appointment to 1 July 2010, directing the appellant to file and serve a draft index by 24 June 2010. Notwithstanding that direction, the appellant failed to file or serve a draft index by 24 June 2010 and, on 29 June 2010, the respondent wrote to the appellant setting out the direction of 8 June 2010. As at 16 July 2010, the appellant had still not served a draft index. 3 On 30 June 2010, the appellant sent to the respondent a draft index which the respondent contends was deficient. That was accepted by the appellant in an email of 1 July 2010, in which the appellant requested an adjournment so that some legal assistance could be obtained. The Deputy District Registrar adjourned the appointment until 13 July 2010. 4 On 8 July 2010, the respondent noted the appellant's failure to serve a draft index. On 13 July 2010, the appellant failed to attend the appointment. The appellant was notified by the Court, by letter of 28 June 2010, of this callover today. Yesterday the appellant purported to provide by email an index in a form that could not be opened by the respondent's solicitors. 5 As I have said, there was no appearance for the appellant today when the matter was called. The appellant has had scant regard for the requirements of the Rules. In the circumstances, the respondent's application for the appeal to be dismissed should be accepted. I order that the appeal be dismissed, with the appellant to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal. I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett. Associate: Dated: 10 August 2010