Weihai Taifu Textile Co Ltd v Australian Bravo Group Pty Ltd [2019] NSWDC 378

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Weihai Taifu Textile Co Ltd v Australian Bravo Group Pty Ltd [2019] NSWDC 378 Hearing dates: 6 August 2019 Date of orders: 06 August 2019 Decision date: 06 August 2019 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Judge Levy SC Decision: Assessment of damages declined – See paragraph [20] for other orders. Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – contract claim – debt for unpaid goods sold and delivered – assessment hearing following entry of default judgment – assessment of damages declined – inadequate and embarrassing particulars expressed in a foreign language – Chinese – abuse of the Court's process – irregularity not amenable to cure by application of s 14 of Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 14, s 58, s 63, s 98 Legal Profession Uniform Application Act 2014 (NSW), cl 4 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 13(1), r 14.28, r 15.1, r 15.10, r 35.3 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Weihai Taifu Textile Co Ltd (Plaintiff) Australian Bravo Group Pty Ltd (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Ms M Bridgett (Plaintiff) No appearance (Defendant)

Solicitors: MLH Lawyers (Plaintiff) File Number(s): 2018/236002 Publication restriction: None

Judgment

Claim 1. This is an application for the assessment of damages in a debt claim. The application is procedurally problematic.

Procedural background 1. The plaintiff, Weihai Taifu Textile Co Ltd, a company incorporated in the People's Republic of China, brings these proceedings against the defendant, Australian Bravo Group Pty Ltd, claiming damages in respect of an alleged debt in the sum of $102,590.26. 2. The original statement of claim was filed on 30 July 2018. On 21 December 2018, the Court Registry refused to enter a default judgment in the proceedings based on the original statement of claim as filed. This was because the requirements of UCPR r 35.3(1) had not been satisfied in that there was no affidavit in support of the application by a member of the plaintiff company; no affidavit of service of the originating process had been filed; and the damages claimed in the proceedings were of a mixed character, namely not entirely liquidated in nature, therefore requiring an application for unliquidated damages to be assessed. 3. The plaintiff now proceeds by way of an amended statement of claim filed on 11 March 2019.