Woodroffe v National Crime Authority [2000] FCA 1052

Woodroffe v National Crime Authority [2000] FCA 1052

Paragraphs 4-7 of the amended consolidated application were struck out because the claims concerning s 59(8) of the National Crime Authority Act 1984 (Cth) were directed to the NCA rather than the Chairperson, no pleaded facts showed that the Chairperson made a relevant decision or was under a duty to make one, and the discretionary power could not support the ADJR Act claims as pleaded. The consolidated statement of claim was struck out because it was unduly complex, unnecessarily convoluted, inadequately particularised, conclusory and likely to cause prejudice, embarrassment and delay. However, given the consistent underlying themes of the applicants' claims and the procedural history,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 August 2000
Procedural Posture
Federal Court Proceeding Seeking Judicial Review, Injunctions, Declarations, Damages and Equitable Relief Concerning a Search Warrant, Dissemination of Information and Taxation Assessments / Interlocutory Determination of Respondents' Notices of Motion to Strike Out Parts of the Amended Consolidated Application and the Consolidated Statement of Claim
Outcome
Paragraphs 4-7 of the amended consolidated application and the consolidated statement of claim were struck out; the applicants were granted leave to file and serve fresh amended pleadings; respondents' motions were otherwise adjourned with liberty to call on; costs were awarded against the applicants in favour of...
Legal Topics
['adjr Act Review' 'judiciary Act S 39 B Relief' 'strike Out of Pleadings' 'summary Disposal' 'national Crime Authority Information Dissemination' 'public Interest Immunity' 'misfeasance in Public Office' 'trespass' 'breach of Confidence' 'use of Information in Taxation Assessments']
['administrative Law' 'federal Jurisdiction' 'civil Procedure' 'taxation' 'search Warrants' 'torts' 'equity'] ['adjr Act Review' 'judiciary Act S 39 B Relief' 'strike Out of Pleadings' 'summary Disposal' 'national Crime Authority Information Dissemination' 'public Interest Immunity' 'misfeasance in Public Office' 'trespass' 'breach of Confidence' 'use of Information in Taxation Assessments']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Federal Court Proceeding Seeking Judicial Review, Injunctions, Declarations, Damages and Equitable Relief Concerning a Search Warrant, Dissemination of Information and Taxation Assessments / Interlocutory Determination of Respondents' Notices of Motion to Strike Out Parts of the Amended Consolidated Application and the Consolidated Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether paragraphs 4-7 of the amended consolidated application concerning alleged failures or decisions of the National Crime Authority under s 59(8) of the National Crime Authority Act 1984 (Cth) should be struck out.' "Whether the applicants' claims against the National Crime Authority, the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation and Mr Williams should be stayed or dismissed at this stage." 'Whether the Court had jurisdiction over the damages claims against the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation for misfeasance in public office and trespass.' 'Whether the consolidated statement of claim was so complex, conclusory, inadequately particularised and embarrassing that it should be struck out.' 'Whether the applicants should be given a further opportunity to plead their case.']

Ratio Decidendi

Paragraphs 4-7 of the amended consolidated application were struck out because the claims concerning s 59(8) of the National Crime Authority Act 1984 (Cth) were directed to the NCA rather than the Chairperson, no pleaded facts showed that the Chairperson made a relevant decision or was under a duty to make one, and the discretionary power could not support the ADJR Act claims as pleaded. The consolidated statement of claim was struck out because it was unduly complex, unnecessarily convoluted, inadequately particularised, conclusory and likely to cause prejudice, embarrassment and delay. However, given the consistent underlying themes of the applicants' claims and the procedural history,...

Court Disposition

Paragraphs 4-7 of the amended consolidated application and the consolidated statement of claim were struck out; the applicants were granted leave to file and serve fresh amended pleadings; respondents' motions were otherwise adjourned with liberty to call on; costs were awarded against the applicants in favour of...

Orders

  • ['Paragraphs 4 - 7 of the amended consolidated application dated 7 April 2000 be struck out.' 'The consolidated statement of claim dated 7 April 2000 be struck out.' 'The applicants have leave to file and serve a fresh amended application and a fresh amended consolidated statement of claim in such terms as they may...