SBG 4282/2015
This case involved goods which had been bought but not paid for. There was a plea that notification processes had not been properly completed as notifications had been given to the defendant's building security and the signature was not his.
Background
A claimant said that the defendant owed him the value of an invoice which showed that he had bought and received some goods from him. The defendants had not paid the money. The defendant did not attend the court hearing.
The claimant said that the notice was given to the guard of the building in which the defendant was living multiple times and he requested that a ruling was issued in absentia. The court issued a ruling requesting the defendant to pay the requested amount.
The defendant submitted a plea to reconsider the ruling saying that he was not notified of the court hearing and that the signature on the served notice was not his signature.
The criminal report said that the signature on the notice was different to that of the defendant.