In the matter of Classic Corporation Limited [2015] NSWSC 2149

The motion was dismissed because particulars 6 and 7 were only particulars to paragraph 44, not allegations of material fact requiring an answer or capable of producing deemed admissions. Any need to particularise an allegation that the loan agreements were shams would arise only if and when that allegation was pleaded as a material fact in reply, not at the current stage.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 05 November 2015
Procedural Posture: Equity Corporations List Procedural Ruling / Notice of Motion Concerning Pleadings and Particulars
Outcome: Notice of motion dismissed.
Legal Topics: ['pleadings' 'particulars' 'allegations of Fraud' 'sham Loan Agreements' 'deemed Admissions']

['civil Procedure' 'corporations'] ['pleadings' 'particulars' 'allegations of Fraud' 'sham Loan Agreements' 'deemed Admissions']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1

Procedural Posture

Equity Corporations List Procedural Ruling / Notice of Motion Concerning Pleadings and Particulars

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether particulars in paragraph 44 of the statement of claim alleging that unexecuted loan agreements were a sham, and that certain persons knew they were a sham, required treatment as allegations of material fact or fraud at the current pleading stage.' 'Whether further particulars of the alleged sham should be provided before a reply is pleaded.']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Notice of motion dismissed.

Orders

["The fourth and fifth defendants' notice of motion of 3 September 2015 is dismissed."]