von Risefer v Permanent Trustee Company Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1052

von Risefer v Permanent Trustee Company Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1052

The proposed statement of claim was beyond redemption because it made serious allegations without particulars, relied on statutory provisions without disclosing any apparent basis for damages by the applicants, and raised matters such as Supreme Court orders and representations to purchasers that did not found the pleaded claims. Leave to amend in accordance with the document was therefore refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 August 2001
Procedural Posture
Proceedings for Damages for Alleged Misconduct by Respondents / Applicants Sought an Extension of Time or Leave to File and Serve a Statement of Claim; Respondent Foreshadowed a Strike Out Application
Outcome
Leave to amend the statement of claim in accordance with the proposed document was declined.
Legal Topics
['adequacy of Statement of Claim' 'particulars of Fraud, Forgery and False Accounting' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'mortgagee in Possession Sale' 'costs']
['civil Procedure' 'trade Practices' 'banking and Finance' 'mortgage Law' 'real Property'] ['adequacy of Statement of Claim' 'particulars of Fraud, Forgery and False Accounting' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'mortgagee in Possession Sale' 'costs']

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

Proceedings for Damages for Alleged Misconduct by Respondents / Applicants Sought an Extension of Time or Leave to File and Serve a Statement of Claim; Respondent Foreshadowed a Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants should be given leave to amend or file and serve the proposed statement of claim out of time.' 'Whether the proposed statement of claim was embarrassing, vexatious or beyond redemption because serious allegations were unparticularised.' 'Whether the pleaded allegations under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), Bank Integration Act 1991 (Cth), Cash Transaction Reports Amendment Act 1991 (Cth) and Crimes Legislation Amendment Act 1992 (Cth) disclosed any basis for a claim for damages by the applicants.' 'Whether complaints about removal of caveats by Supreme Court order could found a cause of action in this proceeding.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed statement of claim was beyond redemption because it made serious allegations without particulars, relied on statutory provisions without disclosing any apparent basis for damages by the applicants, and raised matters such as Supreme Court orders and representations to purchasers that did not found the pleaded claims. Leave to amend in accordance with the document was therefore refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to amend the statement of claim in accordance with the proposed document was declined.

Orders

  • ["The applicants are to pay the respondents' costs of today."]