• Lawyers in Sydney
• Lawyers in Melbourne
• Lawyers in Brisbane
• Lawyers in Perth
• Family lawyers
• Employment lawyers
• Criminal lawyers
• Wills and estates lawyers
• Find a lawyer

File Number(s): 2025/415167

REVISED EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

1. HIS HONOUR: By way of a statement of claim filed on 28 October 2025, the plaintiff seeks damages from the first defendant, Rui Lin, and the second defendant, originally styled the New South Wales Sheriff’s Office. Pursuant to orders made by the Registrar, the plaintiff has amended the name of the second defendant to the State of New South Wales.

2. The matter is before me today for the purposes of determining an amended notice of motion filed on 27 May 2026 by the plaintiff seeking a number of orders, but in effect seeking an order for substituted service as against the first defendant.

3. There is no appearance by the State and, as yet, the first defendant has not been served.

4. The State has not appeared because representatives of the State previously wrote asking to be excused from this particular application as it does not involve the State.

5. As set out in the statement of claim, the plaintiff asserts that he has a cause of action against the first and second defendant because he asserts, subsequent to orders made by this Court that he not be evicted from his premises, the first defendant continued to take action to evict him with such eviction being effected through the Sheriff, that is, the State.

6. The plaintiff seeks damages of $2 million consequent upon his eviction.

7. The plaintiff seeks damages essentially on the basis that he should not have been evicted. I should note that the State has filed a motion seeking to have the proceedings dismissed on the basis that the statement of claim does not disclose a proper cause of action. I raised this with the plaintiff today, pointing out that he will need to ensure that his pleadings disclose a proper cause of action. Be that as it may, I am only dealing with the application for substituted service today.

8. In support of his application, the plaintiff relies on his own affidavits of 9 May 2026 and 7 July 2026.

9. Put simply, he seeks to sue the owner of the premises on the basis that the owner wrongfully, and in breach of court orders, had him evicted. The owner, the first defendant, lives in China. He has previously dealt with matters in Australia through his solicitor and his agent, that is, the agent who manages the property.

10. When the matter was last before me on 26 June 2026, I directed that the plaintiff make contact with the solicitor and the agent, asking whether they were still in contact with the first defendant and still acting for him.

11. The plaintiff annexes that correspondence to his affidavit of 7 July 2026. The solicitor says he no longer acts for the first defendant. In these circumstances, he would not be an appropriate person on whom to affect substituted service.

12. However, I am in receipt of a letter from the first defendant’s agent who confirms that he is the managing agent for the first defendant and does receive mail for him. All communications to the agent are then directed to the first defendant’s power of attorney with respect to his property.

13. The plaintiff must be seeking an order under r 10.14 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW). Rule 10.14 is in the following terms:

10.14 Substituted and informal service generally

(1) If a document that is required or permitted to be served on a person in connection with any proceedings—

(a) cannot practicably be served on the person, or

(b) cannot practicably be served on the person in the manner provided by law,

the court may, by order, direct that, instead of service, such steps be taken as are specified in the order for the purpose of bringing the document to the notice of the person concerned.

(2) An order under this rule may direct that the document be taken to have been served on the person concerned on the happening of a specified event or on the expiry of a specified time.

(3) If steps have been taken, otherwise than under an order under this rule, for the purpose of bringing the document to the notice of the person concerned, the court may, by order, direct that the document be taken to have been served on that person on a date specified in the order.

(3A) An application for an order under this rule must be supported by an affidavit by the applicant that includes—

(a) a statement as to the applicant’s knowledge of the whereabouts of the person to be served, and

(b) a statement as to any communications that have occurred between the applicant and the person to be served since the cause of action in the proceedings arose (including any communications by telephone, fax or electronic mail).

(4) Service in accordance with this rule is taken to constitute personal service.

14. It is plain that the statement of claim cannot be practically served on the first defendant, as he does not live in Australia, and the plaintiff does not have any address for him in China.

15. Steps have been taken to make contact with the first defendant, but he has not responded. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the appropriate order would be that the plaintiff be permitted to serve his statement of claim on the agent by personally delivering it to the agent’s address and informing the agent of the orders I have made.

Orders

16. Therefore, I make the following orders:

17. Order made for substituted service pursuant to r 10.14 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).

18. Order that the statement of claim be served on the first defendant by personally serving a copy on Mr Greg Timms, managing director of Rhodes Realty, Suite 1, Ground floor, 3 Rider Boulevard, Rhodes, New South Wales 2138.

19. Order the plaintiff to inform Mr Timms that the proceedings will be further listed before me on 11 August 2026 for the hearing of the second defendant's motion and for the further case management orders as against the first defendant.

**********