Tru Floor Service Pty Ltd v Jenkins [2006] FCA 119

Tru Floor Service Pty Ltd v Jenkins [2006] FCA 119

Although the applications were very late and unexplained, the defendants' asserted inconvenience was not as real as submitted, the proposed reply and amendments largely reflected matters already flagged or evidence on file, it was important that the plaintiffs put the case they wished to put, and vacating the trial would cause further undesirable delay in an old proceeding. Leave to amend and to file the reply was therefore granted, with the plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs and with directions for the defendants to file contentions and any further amended defence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Proceeding / Interlocutory Applications by the Plaintiffs for Leave to Amend the Statement of Claim and File a Reply Shortly Before Trial
Outcome
Plaintiffs granted leave to file and serve an amended statement of claim and a reply; plaintiffs ordered to pay defendants' costs of the applications; defendants directed to file contentions of fact and law and any further amended defence by 24 February 2006.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'leave to File Reply' 'late Interlocutory Applications' 'costs of Applications']
['civil Procedure'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'leave to File Reply' 'late Interlocutory Applications' 'costs of Applications']

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

Civil Proceeding / Interlocutory Applications by the Plaintiffs for Leave to Amend the Statement of Claim and File a Reply Shortly Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiffs should be granted leave to file and serve an amended statement of claim shortly before the listed hearing date.' 'Whether the plaintiffs should be granted leave to file and serve a reply despite delay and absence of sworn material explaining the delay.' 'Whether the defendants should be given time to file contentions of fact and law and any further amended defence after the amendments.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applications were very late and unexplained, the defendants' asserted inconvenience was not as real as submitted, the proposed reply and amendments largely reflected matters already flagged or evidence on file, it was important that the plaintiffs put the case they wished to put, and vacating the trial would cause further undesirable delay in an old proceeding. Leave to amend and to file the reply was therefore granted, with the plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs and with directions for the defendants to file contentions and any further amended defence.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs granted leave to file and serve an amended statement of claim and a reply; plaintiffs ordered to pay defendants' costs of the applications; defendants directed to file contentions of fact and law and any further amended defence by 24 February 2006.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiffs have leave to file and serve an amended statement of claim in the form handed to the Court on 17 February 2006 as affected by the matters referred to in paragraph 6 of the Reasons.' 'The plaintiffs have leave to file and serve a reply in the form handed to the Court on 17 February 2006.' 'The...