The case concerned Australian Private International Law, specifically giving a Queensland authority to the application of the Moçambique rule.

The plaintiff has sought declarations of constructive trust in respect of a number of properties in Queensland, as well as a sum of money which is said to have been a loan to the defendant.

The defendant has brought a counterclaim in which she seeks a declaration that she is entitled to a proportion of the proceeds of sale of property situated in California, as well as an accounting in relation to other monies, and damages.

Upon the hearing of the application, however, the plaintiff's counsel, Mr Taylor, confined his submissions to the claim in respect of the proceeds of sale of the Californian properties, and couched the relief sought in terms of striking out of the relevant paragraphs, rather than seeking a declaration.

[3]That case was cited with approval by the New South Wales Court of Appeal in Marlborough Harbour Board v Charter Travel Co Ltd.[4] In the latter case, the court was prepared to go somewhat further, deciding that the foreign plaintiff's submission to the jurisdiction extended to a counterclaim which raised a new cause of action, provided that such a cross-claim was founded on or directly arose out of the same subject matter as that of the action.

To similar effect, the English Court of Appeal in Republic of Liberia v Gulf Oceanic Inc[5] concluded that a plaintiff submitted himself to the incidents of his litigation, including liability to a counterclaim properly brought.