//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2008] QDC 174
District Court of Queensland
2008-04-16
Original judgment source is linked above.
HER HONOUR: This is an application for substituted service pursuant to Rule 116(1) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules which allow substituted service where, in effect, there is a practical impossibility of personal service and that the method of service proposed is one which in all reasonable probability, if not certainty, will be effective in bringing knowledge or notice of the proceedings to the attention of the defendant.
The affidavit material that has been filed in support under the hand of Rebecca Carolyn Jaffe, together with the affidavit in support of application, Daniel Lewis Stumm, filed in this Court support the proposition that the last known residential addresses of the defendant had a series of places, namely Slacks Creek, Upper Mount Gravatt, Robinson and another address in Upper Mount Gravatt, have been unsuccessful in locating the defendant for the purpose of personal service. It appears that he has either vacated those premises, has not resided there or indeed has left those resident addresses for a period of time prior to service being attempted to be effected.
I also see that - in the affidavit material that inquiries were made of Ms Holden who was associated with a financial authority who had provided a credit card to the defendant. Inquiries with her support the conclusion that the defendant had had a credit card issued to him of which he subsequently reported as lost or stolen, that all credit card statements had been sent to the particular postal address that had been nominated when initially he had applied for that credit card and subsequently when the form had been filled in that that credit card had been lost or indeed misplaced or stolen, namely as PO Box 457, Mount Gravatt.
Ms Holden also confirmed in the inquiries made that no record of the credit card statements having had been returned to them as not being received. This also was nominated as the relevant address in respect of the reported, as I have said, stolen or lost credit card.
It is for those reasons I consider that personal service where numerous attempts have been made to locate the defendant have been impracticable, that any attempt to provide personal service within the meaning of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules therefore would be fruitless and that the postal address currently as PO Box 457, Mount Gravatt, Queensland being the last known address for the defendant, an address that is likely still in use by the defendant, is the most appropriate address for substituted service.
An alternative was requested in the amended application in order that a sealed copy of the claim might be emailed to the defendant's - what is described as "Facebook page" on the web. I am not so satisfied in light of looking at the - the uncertainty of Facebook pages, the facts that anyone can create an identity that could mimic the true person's identity and indeed some of the information that is provided there does not show me with any real force that the person who created the Facebook page might indeed be the defendant, even though practically speaking it may well indeed be the person who is the defendant.
At this stage, however, I am not inclined to make the alternative order being sought in the amended application. However, I am prepared on the material I have got to order substituted service, as I have stated.
Therefore my order shall be that personal service on the defendant on the claim and statement of claim number 2486/07 be dispensed with.
My second order, that in lieu of personal service a sealed copy of claim number 2486/07 and a copy of this order be served by posting those documents to PO Box 457, Mount Gravatt, Queensland, 4122, being the last known postal address of the defendant and Finance For Us, which was a company, I understand, that the defendant was paying.