District Court debt decisions
Jackson, Sheryl (2011) District Court debt decisions. Proctor, 31(4), pp. 50-51.
This article examines the distinction between a "liquidated demand" and a claim for "unliquidated damages" and the implications of that distinction on the procedure for obtaining a judgment if the defendant fails to file a notice of intention to defend.
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloadsdisplays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Keywords:||liquidated demand, unliquidated damages, default judgment, practice and procedure, Uniform Civil Procedure Rules r 284|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100) > Litigation Adjudication and Dispute Resolution (180123)|
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Law|
Current > Research Centres > Law and Justice Research Centre
Current > Schools > School of Law
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2011 Queensland Law Society Inc|
|Deposited On:||24 Jan 2012 09:24|
|Last Modified:||25 Jan 2012 07:17|
Repository Staff Only: item control page