Dart v Norwich Union Life Australia Limited [2002] FCAFC 34; [2002] FCA 168

Dart v Norwich Union Life Australia Limited [2002] FCAFC 34; [2002] FCA 168

The appeal was dismissed because the statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action, was frivolous and vexatious, and amounted to an abuse of process; the pleading failed to particularise causes of action, damages claimed, and factual bases against specific respondents, despite multiple opportunities for amendment; the claims relating to assignment of lease and alleged causes of action under the Trade Practices Act and common law could not be made out from the facts pleaded.

Parties
First Appellant: Sydney Ronald Dart; Second Appellant: Shirley Norma Dart; Third Appellant: Frederick William Dart; First Respondent: Norwich Union Life Australia Limited; Second Respondent: Vynotas Pty Ltd; Third Respondent: Jones Lang Lasalle (Qld) Pty Limited; Fourth Respondent: Roberts, Nehmer McKee (A Firm) (Formerly Roberts Leu North)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal From a Single Judge Strike Out and Dismissal Order / Full Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Strike Out of Pleadings, No Reasonable Cause of Action, Frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings, Abuse of Process, Trade Practices Act Claims, Damages, Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, Assignment and Novation, Litigants in Person, Summary Dismissal
Practice and Procedure Trade Practices Equity Contract Tort Strike Out of Pleadings No Reasonable Cause of Action Frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings +7 more

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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sydney Ronald Dart

First Appellant

Shirley Norma Dart

Second Appellant

Frederick William Dart

Third Appellant

Norwich Union Life Australia Limited

First Respondent

Vynotas Pty Ltd

Second Respondent

Jones Lang Lasalle (Qld) Pty Limited

Third Respondent

Roberts, Nehmer McKee (A Firm) (Formerly Roberts Leu North)

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From a Single Judge Strike Out and Dismissal Order / Full Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the further amended statement of claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether proceedings were frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether the appeal should be allowed against the orders striking out the pleading and dismissing the proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action, was frivolous and vexatious, and amounted to an abuse of process; the pleading failed to particularise causes of action, damages claimed, and factual bases against specific respondents, despite multiple opportunities for amendment; the claims relating to assignment of lease and alleged causes of action under the Trade Practices Act and common law could not be made out from the facts pleaded.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed with costs.