D & K Developments Pty Ltd v Kumar [2016] NSWSC 1307

D & K Developments Pty Ltd v Kumar [2016] NSWSC 1307

Leave to re-plead the cross-claim in the proposed form is refused because the draft is confusing and embarrassing, does not set out the required legal consequences for the allegations, and does not comply with procedural requirements for pleadings in the list.

Parties
Plaintiff/first Cross Defendant/applicant: D & K Developments Pty Limited; First Defendant/first Cross Claimant/respondent: Rajeev Kumar; Second Defendant/second Cross Claimant/respondent: Rajwant Kaur; Second Cross Defendant: Danny Lance John Rhind; Third Cross Defendant/applicant: Mitchell Brandman (NSW) Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Equity Technology and Construction List / Ruling on Application for Leave to Amend Cross Claim
Outcome
Leave to re-plead cross-claim refused; directions and costs orders made.
Legal Topics
Pleadings, Amendment of Pleadings, Cross Claims
Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment of Pleadings Cross Claims

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D & K Developments Pty Limited

Plaintiff/first Cross Defendant/applicant

Rajeev Kumar

First Defendant/first Cross Claimant/respondent

Rajwant Kaur

Second Defendant/second Cross Claimant/respondent

Danny Lance John Rhind

Second Cross Defendant

Mitchell Brandman (NSW) Pty Limited

Third Cross Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Equity Technology and Construction List / Ruling on Application for Leave to Amend Cross Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to cross-claimants to file the proposed amended cross-claim

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to re-plead the cross-claim in the proposed form is refused because the draft is confusing and embarrassing, does not set out the required legal consequences for the allegations, and does not comply with procedural requirements for pleadings in the list.

Court Disposition

Leave to re-plead cross-claim refused; directions and costs orders made.

Orders

  • Cross-claimants to circulate any proposed further amended cross-claim by 15 September 2016.
  • Notices of motion of 19 July 2016 and 6 September 2016 stood over to 16 September 2016.