Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited v. Psmith and Others

This document discusses the actions against the defendants in the case of Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited v. Psmith and Others. It emphasizes the importance of bringing all actions under one proceeding for a comprehensive solution and timely delivery of justice. It also explores the concept of Alternative Dispute Resolution as a remedial measure. The document highlights the breach of contract and potential damages, as well as the jurisdiction and venue for the proceedings. It also covers the execution of default judgment and the process of serving notice and filing a Statement of Claim.

To:
From:
Date:
Re: Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited v. Psmith and Others
The actions against the defendants can be brought under one proceeding since it would lead
to the exoidiation of the process pertaining to litigation as far as the case of Blackwater
Technology Services Pty Limited v. Psmith and Others is concerned. It would also lead to
the derivation of a comprehensive solution for the plaintiffs as far as capitulation upon their
statement of claim is concerned. It would also imply the aspect pertaining to the delivery of
justice in a timely manner as far as the merits of the case are concerned. It has been observed
that due to delays pertaining to civil litigation in courts of competent jurisdiction, people are
seeking remedial measures by the means of Alternative Dispute Resolution such as
mediation, conciliation and arbitration. As a result, it is imperative that one proceeding
should be taken into consideration as far as the incorporation pertaining to the action to be
initiated against the defendants are concerned accordingly thereby leading to the desired
outcomes without any major delays. It is to be ensured that the aspect pertaining to natural
justice is taken into account accordingly. In the case of Batistatos v Roads and Traffic
Authority of New South Wales, there was an abuse of the due process of law as far as delays
are concerned. Such an abuse implied that the defendant could not be subject to a fair trial as
far as basic human rights and civil liberties are concerned1. In this case, it was held by the
High Court of Australia that in the interest of justice with regard to the conclusion and
derivation of a comprehensive solution, the matter should be dismissed or there should be a
stay order on the proceedings permanently. As implied form the facts of the case Psmith has
been in blatant breach of the contract for the non-payment of the amount of twenty thousand
dollars to Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited thereby paying only two thousand
dollars which further states that the outstanding amount of eighteen thoiusand dollars must
also be paid as implied by the contract when such a contract is executed between the parties
accordingly. As a result, it is imperastive that the remedies for the breach of contract can be
soght after by Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited. It would help in the
compensation to be awarded to Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited on part of
Psmith as decided by the court of competent jurisdiction. Additionally, the payment
pertaining to the outstanding balance of two hundred forty five thousand two hundred and
fifty dollars have also not been received as implied by the contract with regard to the
completion of the activities pertaining to the supply and installation of the system
accordingly. Such an action on part of Psmith also constitutes that violation of the contract
thereby leading to potential damages to the other party. It is also inferred form the facts of
the case that the defendant has engaged any various activities pertaining to malpractices as far
as obtaining expensive products without actually making the required payments as far as the
aspect pertaining to completion of purchase is concerned. Since Australia is under the
jurisdiction of the common law of England and Wales, the common law principles pertaining
to the law of contract can also be applicable accordingly2. As a result, the common law
remedies with reference to the aspect of breach of contract can be taken into account in order
to capitulate upon the Statement of Claim by Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited in
the desired manner. The aspect pertaining to specific performance has been breached by
1 Batistatos v Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales [2006] HCA 27
2 Richard Stone and James Devenney. The modern law of contract. (Routledge, 2017).

Psmith accordingly as far as the non- payment of the amount of two hundred forty five
thousand two hundred and fifty dollars are concerned. As a result, a debt has been imposed
upon Psmith accordingly. It is further imperative that the damages are to be paid to
Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited in an effective and efficient manner as decided
by the court of competent jurisdiction accordingly. Failure of the making of payment on part
of Psmith would lead to the initiation of separate proceedings as far as execution of the order
of the court is concerned in a proper and appropriate manner thereby imposing the liabilities
over Psmith in a stringent manner accordingly. Since the matter pertains to Sydney, the
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules of 2005 framed under the ambit of the Civil Procedure Act of
2005 are applicable accordingly3. Since the claim made by Blackwater Technology Services
Pty Limited is under seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars, the matter is to be filed in the
District Court of New South Wales accordingly as far as the rules pertaining to civil
jurisdiction in the District Court of New South Wales are concerned. Such an aspect is
implied by Section 134 of the District Courts Act of 1974 (New South Wales)4. If Blackwater
Technology Services Pty Limited is not satisfied by the decision made by the District Court
of New South Wales in this matter as far as a comprehensive solution is concerned, an appeal
can be filed in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Subsequent appeal can also be filed
accordingly in the New South Wales Court of Appeal subject to the prescribed limitation
period. Furthermore, appeal can be made at the High Court of Australia, the apex court as far
as the federal level of Australia is concerned. The decision of the High Court of Australia
would be treated as final thereby binding upon both the parties to the contract accordingly.
Part 8 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules of 2005 implies that the venue for the
proceedings would be decided by the plaintiff unless directed by the court otherwise5. As a
result, it is implied form the facts of the case that Blackwater Technology Services Pty
Limited is at adiscretion to decide upon the venue for the proceedings pertaining to litigation
unless it is directed otherwise by the District Court of New South Wales. In the case of R v
Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, Ex Parte Ozone Theatres (Aust) Pty
Ltd, it was held by the High Court of Australia once there is a filing of a matter with regard to
the jurisdiction of the court, the court in question is under an obligation to act upon by the
virtue of the powers vested upon it in order to exercise jurisdiction accordingly6. It was
further asserted by the High Court of Australia that the Court with reference to arbitration had
made a jurisdictional error. The relationship between the parties are to be taken inot account
in order to initiate the proceedings against the defendant Psmith as far as the capitulation
upon the claim of the plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited. In such aspects,
the chain of events must be analyzed in a proper and appropriate mennt so that the averment
of the plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited is prepared in the desired
manner. If the defendant Psmith fails to appear within the period of twenty eight days, the
plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited is at the discretion of making an
application in the District Court of New South Wales with reference to the entering of a
default judgement against the defendant Psmith. Such an application for default judgement is
also valid if some amount of the money claim has been received by the plaintiff as implied
form the facts pf the case pertaining to the amount of two thousand dollars paid to the
plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited by the defendant Psmith. In order to
make an application with regard to the default judgment to be made against the defendant
Psmith, the plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited has to procure and fill out
3 Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)
4 District Courts Act 1974 (NSW)
5 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
6 R v Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, Ex Parte Ozone Theatres (Aust) Pty Ltd (1909)8
CLR 419

the relevant forms accordingly along with the affidavit of service form and the notice of
motion form. However, application for default judgment to be entered against the defendant
Psmith has to be filed by the plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited within
nine months of filing a Statement of Claim failing which the District Court of New South
Wales wold be at a discretion to make orders pertaining to the dismissal of the matter as far
as the merits of the case is concerned since such a delay would result in the violation of the
right to fair trial as far as the respondent Psmith is concerned. If the plaintiff Blackwater
Technology Services Pty Limited still contemplates to continue with the proceedings
accordingly, a fresh Statement of Claim needs to be made accordingly thereby implying the
application of the prescribed time limits concerned accordingly. As far as the execution of the
default judgement by the plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited against the
respondent Psmith is concerned, the time limit for such kind of execution is for twelve years
if the respondent Psmith does not comply with the judgment in the desired manner. If the
debt pertaining to the judgment is not paid by the respondent Psmith in a proper and
appropriate manner within twenty eight days of the execution of the judgment, the rates of
interest pertaining to the amount of debt may be levied upon accordingly. Additionally, the
fees pertaining to the execution of the default judgment may also have to be paid by the
plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited in the desired manner. An examination
notice may also be served upon by the plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited
to the respondent Psmith with regard to the analysis pertaining to the financial condition of
the respondent Psmith in the form of income, expenditures, assets and liabilities. If the
respondent Psmith does not reply within the stipulated timeframe of twenty eight days
accordingly, the plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited may file an
application in the court for the passing of an order for the same against the respondent Psmith
accordingly. Such an order is popularly known as the examination order of a court. The
relevant forms are to filled out, posted or filed by the plaintiff Blackwater Technology
Services Pty Limited in the desired manner so as to capitulate upon the averment in the
desired manner as far as the claims are concerned. Such kinds of aspects are implied by the
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules of 2005 as far as the procedural law of New South Wales is
concerned. The aspect pertaining to service forms one of the most essential parts of
litigation. It would help the defendant Psmith to have a notice pertaining to claim in an
effective and efficient manner as far as the basic principles of natural justice related to
equality and fairness are concerned with reference to the facts of the case. Additionally, the
aspect pertaining to service would also help the court to establish jurisdiction in a proper and
appropriate manner as far as personal actions are concerned. The aspect pertaining to service
implies that once proceedings pertaining to the jurisdiction of the court have been
commenced. In the case of Perrett v Robinson, it was held by the Supreme Court of
Queensland that the aspect pertaining to common law with respect to service is applicable as
far as temporary residence is concerned7. The appeal was also subsequently dismissed by the
High Court of Australia. The aspect pertaining to service is governed by the Uniform Civil
Procedure Rules of 2005 along with the Service and Execution of Process Act of 1992. The
scope and nature with regard to service is dependent upon the kind of action, the kind of
defendant and the jurisdiction accordingly. As a result, it is imperative that the aspect
pertaining to service plays an important role not only with regard to natural justice but also
with reference to the derivation of the comprehensive solution as far as the merits of the case
are concerned. As implied form the facts of the case, the plaintiff Blackwater Technology
Services Pty Limited must service a notice of claim upon the respondent Psmith in a proper
and appropriate manner. It is to be ensured that the respondent Psmith is well informed about
the claim in the desired manner thereby stipulating the required timeframe to appear in court
7 Perrett v Robinson [1988] HCA 41

and present its reply accordingly. It would help in the derivation of the desired outcomes in a
proper and appropriate manner as far as the finality of the judgment by the court is concerned
in the interst of equity and justice as deemed to be fit and proper by the court. The aspect
pertaining to service that it should be personal as far as the handing of the copy pertaining to
the court documents to the defendant is concerned. The criteria pertaining to service has been
observed by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales in the case of Ainsworth v Redd as far
as the formal guidelines pertaining to the validation of service is concerned8. Such a case
implies the requirements to be followed with regard to service pertaining to the documents as
far as the case is concerned in order to imply fairness with reference to the principles of
natural justice accordingly. It implies that the plaintiff Blackwater Technology Services Pty
Limited must delve into the decision made by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales in the
case of Ainsworth v Redd as far as the service of the relevant documents to the respondent
Psmith is concerned with regard to he commencement of the proceedings in a timely manner
thereby resulting in the appropriate decision to be made by the court in favor of the plaintiff
Blackwater Technology Services Pty Limited accordingly thereby executing the Statement of
Claim in an effective and efficient manner. Part 6 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules of
2005 implies the aspect pertaining to Statement of Claim. Rule 6.3 of the Uniform Civil
Procedure Rules of 2005 implies that the claims can be both liquidated and unligquated
pertaining to the facts of the case. In the District Court of New South Wales, the filinfg of a
Statement of Claim would result in the commencement of proceedings accordingly. As a
result, it is imperative form the facts of the case that the plaintiff Blackwater Technology
Services Pty Limited must file a Statement of Claim in order to make sure that the
proceedings in the District Court of New South Wales are commenced in a proper and
appropriate manner within the stipulated timeframe without any major hurdles or obstacles as
far as the aspect pertaining to the delivery of justice in a proper and appropriate manner is
concerned as aforesaid. As a result, it is imperative that the concept pertaining to Statement
of Claim is justified and appropriate
8 Ainsworth v Redd (1990) 19 NSWLR 78

Bibliography
Ainsworth v Redd (1990) 19 NSWLR 78
Batistatos v Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales [2006] HCA 27
Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)
District Courts Act 1974 (NSW)
Perrett v Robinson [1988] HCA 41
R v Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, Ex Parte Ozone Theatres (Aust)
Pty Ltd (1909)8 CLR 419
Richard Stone and James Devenney. The modern law of contract. (Routledge, 2017).
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)