Loading...
Queensland Judgments

beta

Authorised Reports & Unreported Judgments
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
  • Unreported Judgment

Jonsson v Prendergast

 

[2002] QSC 67

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CIVIL JURISDICTION

JONES J

Application No 1 of 2002

IN THE MATTER OF DISCOVER DIVE SERVICES PTY LTD

(IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 081 419 641

ANTHONY JAMES JONSSON AND BRUCE POUNTNEY MILNER

Applicants

and

 

JOHN ANTHONY PRENDERGAST

Respondent

CAIRNS

DATE 08/02/2002

JUDGMENT

HIS HONOUR: This is an application for substituted service on the respondent to an application, Mr John Prendergast. The application is made by the liquidators of Discover Dive Services Pty Ltd (In Liquidation). The application is to determine whether Mr Prendergast has a beneficial interest in a permit issued by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, permitting various diving operations in certain parts of the Great Barrier Reef. The liquidators wish to sell that permit and to do so quickly. Whilst Mr Prendergast maintains this claim, it is difficult for them to do that without an order of the Court.

Their proposal, if they are permitted to sell, would be to pay the moneys into Court until the determination of the dispute. The starting point, however, is for Mr Prendergast to be made aware of the liquidators' wishes in this regard.

HIS HONOUR: Mr Prendergast is, ordinarily, a resident in the United States of America, but he does visit Australia, and in particular Queensland, from time to time. In material emanating from him, he claims to have been the owner and to have sold two vessels, namely the vessel “Shaolin” and “Cape Peron II”. Solicitors for the liquidators have undertaken searches to establish the current ownership of those vessels. The last mentioned vessel does not appear to be registered at the Australian Shipping Register. The former is owned by a West Indian company.

Of more importance, the solicitors have discovered that the respondent is the principal of a proprietary company, Radhigh Pty Ltd, which maintains a business address in Cairns, and the relevant extract of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission shows a principal place of business of that company as Unit 4, 14 Grant Street, Port Douglas.

That being the state of the evidence, it seems to me appropriate to order the substituted service of Mr Prendergast, whose whereabouts has not been able to be established, by serving the documents at the business address of the company of which he is the principal officer, namely care of Accounting and Financial Services, 15-17 Pease Street, Manoora and at the principal place of business of that company at Unit 4, 14 Grant Street, Port Douglas.

I propose to order that service be effected by leaving the relevant documents at both of those addresses. The originating application will be re-listed for hearing on the 25th of February 2002, and the costs of the application will be costs in the cause. I make orders generally in terms of the draft initialled by me and placed with the papers.

Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    Anthony James Jonsson v John Anthony Prendergast

  • Shortened Case Name:

    Jonsson v Prendergast

  • MNC:

    [2002] QSC 67

  • Court:

    QSC

  • Judge(s):

    Jones J

  • Date:

    08 Feb 2002

Litigation History

No Litigation History

Appeal Status

No Status