Dai v Zhu [2013] NSWCA 412

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Dai v Zhu [2013] NSWCA 412 Hearing dates: 29 October 2013 Decision date: 05 December 2013 Before: Barrett JA at [1]; Leeming JA at [2]; Sackville AJA at [3]. Decision: 1. Grant leave to the applicants to appeal. 2. Direct the applicants to file a notice of appeal within seven days. 3. Dismiss the appeal. 4. The applicants to pay the respondents' costs of the application for leave to appeal and the appeal. [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Catchwords: SUMMARY DISPOSAL - applicants in default of discovery obligations - orders made striking out their defence and entering judgment against them - whether primary Judge erred in factual findings - re-exercise of discretion - SUMMARY DISPOSAL - Judgment entered in default of filing a defence - whether primary Judge erred in refusing to set aside judgment - re-exercise of discretion - significance of failure to put on evidence of a bona fide defence Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005, ss 56, 57, 58, 59, 61 Fair Trading Act 1987, s 42 Supreme Court Act 1970, s 101(2)(e)

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, rr 12.7, 14.28, 16.2, 16.3, 16.7, 21.3, 36.16 Cases Cited: Adams v Kennick Trading (Int) Ltd (1986) 4 NSWLR 503 Allesch v Maunz [2000] HCA 40; 203 CLR 172 Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 (HL) Commissioner of Australian Federal Police v Propend Finance Pty Ltd [1997] HCA 3; 188 CLR 501 Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Humphreys [2010] NSWSC 581 Davison v Queensland [2006] HCA 21; 226 CLR 234 Emmerton v Clerk of the Supreme Court [1992] NSWCA 65 Evans v Bartlam [1937] AC 473 Ex parte Vigilant Finance (NSW) Pty Ltd; Re Cameron Smith [1964] NSWR 1282 Expense Reduction Analysts Group Pty Ltd v Armstrong Strategic Management and Marketing Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 46 Frankenstein v Gavin's House-to-House Cycle Cleaning and Insurance Co [1897] 2 QB 62 Fruehauf Finance Corp Pty Ltd v Zurich Australian Insurance Ltd (1990) 20 NSWLR 359 Hans Pet Constructions Pty Limited v Cassar [2009] NSWCA 230 Hartogen Energy Ltd (in liq) v Australian Gas Light Co (1992) 36 FCR 557 Magnate Projects Pty Ltd v Youma Constructions (No 2) Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 331 Mulley v Manifold [1959] HCA 23; 103 CLR 341 Nash v Swinburne (1841) 3 Man & G 630; 133 ER 1293 Procter v Kalivis [2009] FCA 1518; 263 ALR 461 Reinehr Industrial Lease & Finance Pty Ltd v Jordan (New South Wales Court of Appeal, 4 June 1974, unreported) Rubin v Eacott [1912] HCA 55; 15 CLR 386 Saunders v Hammond [1965] QWN 39 Taylor v Taylor [1979] HCA 38; 143 CLR 1 Vacuum Oil Co Pty Ltd v Stockdale (1942) 42 SR (NSW) 239 Zhu v Yingle Culture Exchange (Australia) Pty Ltd ACN 113 089 759 (In Liquidation) [2010] NSWSC 107 Zhu v Yingle Culture Exchange (Australia) Pty Ltd ACN 113 089 759 (In Liquidation) (No 2) [2010] NSWSC 305 Zhu v Yingle Culture Exchange (Australia) Pty Ltd ACN 113 089 759 (In Liquidation) (No 4) [2011] NSWSC 473 Zhu v Yingle Culture Exchange (Australia) Pty Limited; Zhu v Dai [2011] NSWSC 1339 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Qin Fen Dai (First Applicant) Carter Bai (Second Applicant) Yi Lin Zhu (First Respondent) Lei Jiang (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: M Dicker SC (Applicants) M McHugh SC and A Di Francesco (Respondents) Solicitors: Luminous Legal (Applicants) Thomsons Lawyers (Respondents) File Number(s): 2012/362844 Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 9111 Citation: Zhu v Yingle Culture Exchange (Australia) Pty Ltd (In Liq); Zhu v Dai (No 2) [2012] NSWSC 1305 Date of Decision: 2012-10-26 00:00:00 Before: Rothman J File Number(s): 289276/2008, 185762/2011