Rochester Communications Group Pty Ltd & Ors v Adler, Rodney Stephen & Ors [1997] FCA 62

Rochester Communications Group Pty Ltd & Ors v Adler, Rodney Stephen & Ors [1997] FCA 62

The pleadings were deficient in material facts and particulars, especially as to the role and liability of various respondents, but justice required allowing the applicants an opportunity to amend on the condition that amendments are supported by affidavit. The twelfth and thirteenth respondents (receivers) were struck out as no claim was made against them. Costs were reserved.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 January 1997
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion in Complex Commercial Litigation / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out Pleadings and for Leave to Replead
Outcome
Application to strike out parts of the pleading granted in part; further leave to amend granted on conditions; receivers (twelfth and thirteenth respondents) dismissed; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['pleading Amendments' 'joinder of Parties' 'particulars in Pleadings' 'oppression Remedy' 'winding Up' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct']
['civil Procedure' 'corporations Law'] ['pleading Amendments' 'joinder of Parties' 'particulars in Pleadings' 'oppression Remedy' 'winding Up' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct']

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

Notice of Motion in Complex Commercial Litigation / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out Pleadings and for Leave to Replead

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the third amended application and the fourth amended statement of claim should be struck out in whole or in part' 'Whether there is sufficient particularity in the pleading of claims for misleading or deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct' 'Whether the twelfth and thirteenth respondents (receivers) should remain as parties' 'Whether the applicants should have liberty to further amend their statement of claim' 'Whether particulars of alleged breaches under s.232 of the Corporations Law have been sufficiently pleaded']

Ratio Decidendi

The pleadings were deficient in material facts and particulars, especially as to the role and liability of various respondents, but justice required allowing the applicants an opportunity to amend on the condition that amendments are supported by affidavit. The twelfth and thirteenth respondents (receivers) were struck out as no claim was made against them. Costs were reserved.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out parts of the pleading granted in part; further leave to amend granted on conditions; receivers (twelfth and thirteenth respondents) dismissed; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['The third amended application and the fourth amended statement of claim be struck out as against the third, twelfth and thirteenth respondents.' 'Paragraphs 13I and 13K of the fourth amended statement of claim be struck out.' 'Paragraph 11 of the third amended application be struck out against the first...