NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Rahal v Abedin [2022] NSWSC 232 Hearing dates: 28 October 2021 Date of orders: 8 March 2022 Decision date: 08 March 2022 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Walton J Decision: (1) The motion filed by the defendants on 14 September 2021 is dismissed. (2) The defendants shall pay the costs of the motion as agreed or, in default, as assessed. Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – default judgment – setting aside – UCPR 36.16 – bona fide defence on merits – explanation of delay – unsatisfactory evidence – no defence on merits or explanation of delay – application refused CIVIL PROCEDURE – default judgment – setting aside – irregularity in statement of claim – UCPR 36.15 – s 63 Civil Procedure Act – types of irregularities that will necessitate setting aside – omission of material facts necessary to support the pleaded cause of action – no such errors found – application refused Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: Arnold v Forsythe [2012] NSWCA 18 Fenato v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue (2010) 78 NSWLR 20; [2010] NSWCA 80 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Narinder Singh Rahal (First Plaintiff) Sarojny Rahal (Second Plaintiff) Mohammad Abedin (First Defendant) Xiaoyan Tang (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel: H Durack (Plaintiff) B Long (Defendant)
Solicitors: Craig Milne & Company (Plaintiff) Celtic Legal (Defendant) File Number(s): 2021/148251 Publication restriction: Nil
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate