National Australia Bank Limited v Kim Francis Hunter & Anor (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 763

National Australia Bank Limited v Kim Francis Hunter & Anor (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 763

Leave to amend the cross-claim to add causes of action under the Trade Practices Act 1974 was refused because the proceedings were at an advanced stage with evidence closed, and permitting such amendment would cause prejudice to the opposing party as it would require re-calling witnesses, particularly one who is difficult to locate; it is not appropriate to allow a party to raise a new point after all evidence has concluded.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Amend the Cross Claim After Evidence Closed
Outcome
Leave to amend granted in part, refused in part—leave granted to file an amended cross-claim excluding amendments relating to the Trade Practices Act 1974; motions for amendments regarding the Trade Practices Act 1974 dismissed.
Legal Topics
['pleadings' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'contract' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'code of Banking Practice']
['civil Procedure'] ['pleadings' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'contract' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'code of Banking Practice']

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

Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Amend the Cross Claim After Evidence Closed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to amend a cross-claim to include a cause of action under s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 after the evidence has closed' 'Whether such amendment would cause prejudice to the opposing party']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend the cross-claim to add causes of action under the Trade Practices Act 1974 was refused because the proceedings were at an advanced stage with evidence closed, and permitting such amendment would cause prejudice to the opposing party as it would require re-calling witnesses, particularly one who is difficult to locate; it is not appropriate to allow a party to raise a new point after all evidence has concluded.

Court Disposition

Leave to amend granted in part, refused in part—leave granted to file an amended cross-claim excluding amendments relating to the Trade Practices Act 1974; motions for amendments regarding the Trade Practices Act 1974 dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to the second defendant/cross claimant to file in Court an Amended First Cross Claim and Statement of Cross Claim but in a form excluding any proposed amendment in relation to the Trade Practices Act 1974.' "Dismiss the second defendant/cross claimant's motions seeking amendments to the First Cross...