Power Infrastructure Pty Ltd v Downer EDI Engineering Power Pty Ltd (No. 3) [2011] FCA 539

Power Infrastructure Pty Ltd v Downer EDI Engineering Power Pty Ltd (No. 3) [2011] FCA 539

Most of Power's requests were refused because the particulars already provided sufficiently exposed DEE's case and the further requests sought evidence, premature calculations or information better addressed after discovery, in a manner inconsistent with the overarching purpose. Limited further particulars were required only for subparagraph 29(a) of the amended defence because DEE should identify the further information said to give rise to estoppel, waiver and/or acknowledgment and clarify the arrangements between the parties referred to in that pleading.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure Motion for Further and Better Particulars of the Amended Defence and Amended Cross Claim / Motion Filed on 15 April 2011 and Heard on 6 May 2011
Outcome
Motion partly granted; otherwise dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['further and Better Particulars' 'sufficiency of Particulars' 'material Facts and Evidence' 'overarching Purpose' 'federal Court Rules O 12' 'estoppel, Waiver and Acknowledgment Pleading']
['practice and Procedure' 'civil Procedure' 'pleadings'] ['further and Better Particulars' 'sufficiency of Particulars' 'material Facts and Evidence' 'overarching Purpose' 'federal Court Rules O 12' 'estoppel, Waiver and Acknowledgment Pleading']

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

Practice and Procedure Motion for Further and Better Particulars of the Amended Defence and Amended Cross Claim / Motion Filed on 15 April 2011 and Heard on 6 May 2011

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether DEE should be ordered to provide further and better particulars of allegations concerning compliance with DEE's codes of conduct." 'Whether DEE should be ordered to provide further particulars of allegations of overcharging and misleading or deceptive on-cost representations.' "Whether Power's requests sought material facts necessary to know the case to be met or impermissibly sought evidence and imposed an unreasonable burden contrary to the overarching purpose." 'Whether further particulars should be ordered of the alleged estoppel, waiver and/or acknowledgment pleaded in subparagraph 29(a) of the amended defence.']

Ratio Decidendi

Most of Power's requests were refused because the particulars already provided sufficiently exposed DEE's case and the further requests sought evidence, premature calculations or information better addressed after discovery, in a manner inconsistent with the overarching purpose. Limited further particulars were required only for subparagraph 29(a) of the amended defence because DEE should identify the further information said to give rise to estoppel, waiver and/or acknowledgment and clarify the arrangements between the parties referred to in that pleading.

Court Disposition

Motion partly granted; otherwise dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The respondent provide particulars of the further information giving rise to the alleged estoppel or waiver and/or acknowledgment pleaded in subparagraph 29(a) of the amended defence.' 'The respondent identify the arrangements between the parties, to which reference is made in subparagraph 29(a) of the amended...