Meadowlands BFT Pty Ltd v Shoalhaven City Council [2021] NSWSC 773

Meadowlands BFT Pty Ltd v Shoalhaven City Council [2021] NSWSC 773

Leave to amend the statement of claim to introduce a new cause of action was refused because there was no sufficient explanation from the moving party for the delay in bringing the amendment, the amendment constituted a radically different case close to hearing, and permitting the amendment would cause substantial delay and prejudice to the defendant that is unlikely to be remedied, while the likelihood of multiplicity of proceedings did not outweigh this prejudice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Application to Amend Statement of Claim and Transfer Proceedings / Interlocutory (motion to Amend Statement of Claim)
Outcome
Application to amend statement of claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'practice and Procedure' 'multiplicity of Proceedings' 'costs']
['civil Procedure'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'practice and Procedure' 'multiplicity of Proceedings' '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

Application to Amend Statement of Claim and Transfer Proceedings / Interlocutory (motion to Amend Statement of Claim)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether to grant leave to the plaintiff to amend its statement of claim and introduce a new cause of action in negligence.' 'Whether there was sufficient explanation for the delay in seeking the amendment.' 'The potential for multiplicity of proceedings if the amendment was refused and the balance of prejudice between the parties.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend the statement of claim to introduce a new cause of action was refused because there was no sufficient explanation from the moving party for the delay in bringing the amendment, the amendment constituted a radically different case close to hearing, and permitting the amendment would cause substantial delay and prejudice to the defendant that is unlikely to be remedied, while the likelihood of multiplicity of proceedings did not outweigh this prejudice.

Court Disposition

Application to amend statement of claim dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The amended notice of motion bearing the date 25 May 2021 is dismissed.' "The plaintiff pay the defendant's costs of the motion." 'List the matter for directions before Beech-Jones J at 9.30am on 2 August 2021.']