Kaplan v State of Victoria (No 2) [2022] FCA 679

Kaplan v State of Victoria (No 2) [2022] FCA 679

Leave was granted to the respondents to amend their defence, as the amendments were relatively minor, clarifying, and not seriously prejudicial. Leave was refused to the applicants to amend their statement of claim to plead a new issue under s 28LC(2)(a) of the Wrongs Act, as the new allegation did not have reasonable prospects of success and would cause prejudice and trial disruption, with insufficient material facts pleaded.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Pre Trial
Outcome
Respondents granted leave to file amended defence; applicants' application for leave to amend statement of claim refused.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'leave to Amend Defence' 'leave to Amend Statement of Claim' 'notice of New Allegation' 'prejudice to Parties' 'wrongs Act']
['practice and Procedure'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'leave to Amend Defence' 'leave to Amend Statement of Claim' 'notice of New Allegation' 'prejudice to Parties' 'wrongs Act']

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

Interlocutory Application / Pre Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to the respondents to amend their defence.' 'Whether leave should be granted to the applicants to amend their statement of claim to plead a new issue under Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s 28LC(2)(a).']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted to the respondents to amend their defence, as the amendments were relatively minor, clarifying, and not seriously prejudicial. Leave was refused to the applicants to amend their statement of claim to plead a new issue under s 28LC(2)(a) of the Wrongs Act, as the new allegation did not have reasonable prospects of success and would cause prejudice and trial disruption, with insufficient material facts pleaded.

Court Disposition

Respondents granted leave to file amended defence; applicants' application for leave to amend statement of claim refused.

Orders

  • ['The respondents have leave to file an amended defence pursuant to rule 16.53 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) in the form contained in annexure CI-1 to the affidavit of Caitlin Ible, affirmed 25 May 2022.' "The applicants' interlocutory application dated 1 June 2022 for leave to amend their statement of claim...