Baycliff Marine Trading Pty Ltd v Papua New Guinea Department of Defence, Deputy Secretary of [1999] QSC 263
. \
)
370&to.
State Reporting SCCiJ9/:<.63 -rr' I ~
Bureau
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
Copyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must not be made
or sold without the written authority of the Director, State Reporting Bureau .
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CIVU.L JURISDICTION
JONES J
Writ No 177 of 1998
BAYCLIFF MARINE TRADING PTY LTD
and
THE DEPUTY SECRETARY PAPUA NEW GUINEA
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE
and
THE INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA
and
F G AIKUNG OBE
CAIRNS
.. DATE 21/07/99
JUDGMENT
1
Plaintiff
First Defendant
Second Defendant
Third Defendant
"~I'III"r, Till' I.aw Courts, Ct'ol'ge Stred, Brishalll', Q. 4f)OO Tl'kphOIll': (07) JZ.t7 4J(10 Fax: (07) JZ.t7 SSJZ
-- 1 of 2 --
210799 D.1 T1/LET M/T CNS611/98 (Jones J)
HIS HONOUR: In the matter of Baycliff Marine Trading Pty Ltd,
counsel on behalf of the plaintiff and second defendant have
indicated that there is no point in further proceeding against
the first defendant and the appropriate course, it has been
agreed upon, is that the plaintiff's action against the first
defendant should be struck out.
In the material brief read to me it is clear that the Judgment
entered against the second defendant has been irregularly
entered. It is not necessary in the circumstances and in
relation to the discussions which have been had between myself
and between counsel to detail the various points of
irregularity. It is necessary in the circumstances, that the
Judgment entered on 11 May 1999 be set aside and it will
follow from that that I order the plaintiff to pay the costs
of the second defendant of and incidental to this application
to set the Judgment aside.
I give leave to the plaintiff to re-deliver a statement of
claim within 14 days from today's date.
The plaintiff is ordered also to pay the costs of and
incidental to the first defendant's appearance today.
2 JUDGMENT
10
30
40
50
60
!
/
-- 2 of 2 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QSC/1999/263