Centaur Litigation Limited (in liq) v Strong [2018] FCA 1715

Centaur Litigation Limited (in liq) v Strong [2018] FCA 1715

Leave to amend the defence was refused because the seventh and eighth defendants gave no explanation for their delay in raising a Professional Standards Act defence, failed to notify the plaintiffs promptly after Allianz revised its indemnity position, and provided the draft amended defence only six clear business days before the hearing. Granting leave would be inconsistent with the overarching purpose in s 37M(1), would prejudice the plaintiffs by denying them the opportunity to address the issue earlier and by creating uncertainty about insurance coverage, and would likely derail the proceeding if Allianz were joined after five hearing days had already occurred. Costs would not...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial and Corporations Proceeding; Interlocutory Application for Leave to Amend Defence / During Final Hearing of the Substantive Application, the Seventh and Eighth Defendants Sought Leave to Amend Their Defence to Rely on the Professional Standards Act 1994 (nsw) and an Approved Scheme
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
['leave to Amend Defence' 'delay in Seeking Amendment' 'overarching Purpose' 'professional Standards Act 1994 (nsw) Liability Cap' 'professional Indemnity Insurance' 'knowing Assistance Under Barnes V Addy']
['practice and Procedure' 'commercial and Corporations' 'corporations and Corporate Insolvency' 'professional Standards' 'equity'] ['leave to Amend Defence' 'delay in Seeking Amendment' 'overarching Purpose' 'professional Standards Act 1994 (nsw) Liability Cap' 'professional Indemnity Insurance' 'knowing Assistance Under Barnes V Addy']

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

Commercial and Corporations Proceeding; Interlocutory Application for Leave to Amend Defence / During Final Hearing of the Substantive Application, the Seventh and Eighth Defendants Sought Leave to Amend Their Defence to Rely on the Professional Standards Act 1994 (nsw) and an Approved Scheme

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the seventh and eighth defendants should be granted leave to amend their defence to plead reliance on the Professional Standards Act 1994 (NSW) and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia (NSW) Scheme.' 'Whether permitting the late amendment was consistent with the overarching purpose in s 37M(1) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).' 'Whether the plaintiffs would suffer prejudice, including forensic prejudice, prejudice from delay to the hearing, and prejudice arising from the insurer not being joined.' "Whether evidence concerning Allianz's indemnity position was sufficient for the proposed professional standards scheme defence to be determined without joining Allianz."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend the defence was refused because the seventh and eighth defendants gave no explanation for their delay in raising a Professional Standards Act defence, failed to notify the plaintiffs promptly after Allianz revised its indemnity position, and provided the draft amended defence only six clear business days before the hearing. Granting leave would be inconsistent with the overarching purpose in s 37M(1), would prejudice the plaintiffs by denying them the opportunity to address the issue earlier and by creating uncertainty about insurance coverage, and would likely derail the proceeding if Allianz were joined after five hearing days had already occurred. Costs would not...

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • ['Leave to amend the defence is refused.']