Nixon v Philip Morris (Australia) Ltd [1999] FCA 1228

Nixon v Philip Morris (Australia) Ltd [1999] FCA 1228

Leave was granted because the respondents had already had a full opportunity to raise strike out, pleading and jurisdictional objections; the current objections were either new, repeated matters previously dealt with, or did not fall within the limited category contemplated by the earlier directions; and the current Statement of Claim was a vast improvement and appropriate to be filed, with lobbying-allegation concerns to be dealt with initially by particulars.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 August 1999
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceeding / Interlocutory Application for Leave to File a Further Amended Application and a Further Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Leave granted to the applicants to file a Further Amended Application and a Further Amended Statement of Claim.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'statement of Claim' 'particulars' 'separate Determination of Issues']
['civil Procedure' 'representative Proceedings'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'statement of Claim' 'particulars' 'separate Determination of Issues']

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

Representative Proceeding / Interlocutory Application for Leave to File a Further Amended Application and a Further Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants should be granted leave to file a Further Amended Application and a Further Amended Statement of Claim in accordance with the drafts provided.' "Whether the respondents' objections were fresh problems or failures to comply with rulings or assumptions in the earlier reasons." 'Whether objections concerning the lobbying allegation should prevent filing of the Further Amended Statement of Claim.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted because the respondents had already had a full opportunity to raise strike out, pleading and jurisdictional objections; the current objections were either new, repeated matters previously dealt with, or did not fall within the limited category contemplated by the earlier directions; and the current Statement of Claim was a vast improvement and appropriate to be filed, with lobbying-allegation concerns to be dealt with initially by particulars.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to the applicants to file a Further Amended Application and a Further Amended Statement of Claim.

Orders

  • ["The applicants have leave to file a Further Amended Application and a Further Amended Statement of Claim in accordance with the drafts provided yesterday to the judge's associate and the respondents." 'In paragraph (d) of the description of the represented persons, the blank before the date "1999" is to have...