Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Zou

(a) by emailing the respondent at his email address 22859988@163.com; and

(b) by leaving the documents at a property in Ashfield, New South Sales (Ashfield property), marked to the attention of the respondent.

1. The original Warrant lapsed and, on 27 March 2025, a new Warrant was obtained for the seizure and sale of the Property, pursuant to Order 68 of the then Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 (Vic).
2. On 11 December 2025, the DCT's solicitors received an email from the Sheriff's Office advising that the Property is listed for auction on 12 February 2026 and that the Sheriff's Sale Advertisement must be personally served on the respondent at least 14 days prior to the day of sale, or if personal service cannot occur, the DCT must seek an order for substituted service or an order dispensing with service of the Sale Advertisement on the debtor. Furthermore, at least three days prior to the auction, the DCT is required to file an affidavit of service or, if personal service cannot occur, a copy of the order dispensing with service of the Sale Advertisement or the order for substituted service and an affidavit demonstrating compliance with that order.

1. Rule 69.06 of the Supreme Court Rules provides for the 'Advertisement of sale' of properties seized by the Sheriff under a Warrant. Rule 69.06(1) effectively provides that, before putting property up for sale under a Warrant, the Sheriff must advertise the sale by giving notice of the time and place of sale and of particulars of the property in the manner which will best give publicity to the sale.
2. Rule 69.06(4) of the Supreme Court Rules requires a creditor, in respect of a sale by the Sheriff under a Warrant, to personally serve a copy of the Advertisement of sale on the debtor not less than 14 days before the date of the intended sale. Rule 69.06(5) provides that the "Court" may dispense with personal service under r 69.06(4). Although the term "Court" is not defined in the Supreme Court Rules, it is self-evidently a reference to the Supreme Court of Victoria: see also s 3 of the Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic).
3. Rule 69.06(4) of the Supreme Court Rules has two requirements, first, personal service, and second, that service occur 14 days before sale. The applicant sought orders dispensing with the first requirement, with the second requirement (either wholly or to an extent that would allow the 12 February 2026 auction to proceed), or alternatively, dispensing with service of the Sale Advertisement altogether.
4. This proceeding was issued in the Victorian Registry of this Court and the judgment was given in Victoria, where the Property is located.
5. Section 53 of the FCA Act provides that, subject to the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), a person in whose favour a judgment of the Court is given is entitled to the same remedies for enforcement of the judgment in a State or Territory, by execution or otherwise, as are allowed in like cases by the laws of that State or Territory to persons in whose favour a judgment of the Supreme Court of that State or Territory is given.
6. Rule 41.10(1) of the Rules provides:

A party who wants to enforce a judgment or order of the Court may apply to the Court to make an order, to issue any writ, or to take any other step that can be taken in the Supreme Court of the State or Territory in which the judgment or order has been made as if the judgment or order was a judgment or order of that Supreme Court.

1. In relation to the application of r 41.10(1), see Copeland (liquidator) v Odeesh, FBF Transport Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2024] FCA 1400 at [10] and [18] (Wigney J) and Siemens WLL v BIC Contracting LLC (2023) 301 FCR 404; [2023] FCA 1664 at [19] (Stewart J).
2. Pursuant to r 10.44 of the Rules, this Court can make orders granting leave for an interlocutory application to be served outside Australia, which may be given with any directions that the Court considers appropriate. Orders for substituted service outside Australia may be made under r 10.24 where leave to serve out of the jurisdiction has been obtained under r 10.43: Ford, in the matter of Careers Australia Group Ltd (in liq) v Mansfield [2022] FCA 173 (O'Bryan J) and the authorities cited at [32].
3. On the basis of the materials relied upon by the DCT and the history of this matter, I am satisfied that personal service on the respondent is not practical given the respondent's absence from Australia and that his whereabouts in China are unknown. Furthermore, I am satisfied that is appropriate to make orders as follows:

(a) pursuant to r 41.10 of the Rules, dispensing with the requirement for service personal service on the respondent of the Sheriff's Sale Advertisement not less than 14 days before the date of the intended sale of the Property;

(b) pursuant to r 10.44 of the Rules, giving leave to serve the respondent outside Australia with the application, the Sheriff's Sale Advertisement and other documents listed in the application (Relevant Documents); and

(c) pursuant to r 10.24 of the Rules, for substituted service of the Relevant Documents on the respondent by no later than 9 February 2026 as follows:

(i) by emailing the Relevant Documents to the email address 22859988@163.com, which is an email address that was provided by the respondent on his last income tax return and to which previous documents have been sent on behalf of the DCT, without any notification that the emails were undelivered; and

(ii) by leaving the Relevant Documents at the Ashfield property, which is currently owned by the respondent's wife and was listed as the respondent's postal address on his last income tax return.

1. Orders will be made giving effect to these reasons, with liberty to apply.

I certify that the preceding twenty-two (22) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Neskovcin.