The Owners - Strata Plan No. 68372 v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2013] NSWSC 1095

The Owners - Strata Plan No. 68372 v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2013] NSWSC 1095

The amendments concerning Rubikcon and Geotech were allowed because GEO had already pleaded them as concurrent wrongdoers, the proposed amendments substantially provided particulars of existing allegations, the plaintiff was aware that concurrent wrongdoer liability was in issue, and expert material already addressed Geotech's role. The amendment adding Mepstead was refused because GEO had long had sufficient material to advance it, the amendment was sought shortly before the referee's hearing, and allowing it would require the plaintiff to consider joinder, additional evidence, expert work, documents, and a large volume of material, causing significant and unjustifiable distraction and...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Amendments to Defence and Cross Claim / Notice of Motion Filed on 22 July 2013 Heard on 6 August 2013
Outcome
Amendments allowed in part
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'defence and Cross Claim' 'proportionate Liability' 'concurrent Wrongdoers' 'delay and Prejudice']
['practice and Procedure' 'building and Construction' 'insurance' 'strata Title'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'defence and Cross Claim' 'proportionate Liability' 'concurrent Wrongdoers' 'delay and Prejudice']

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 for Amendments to Defence and Cross Claim / Notice of Motion Filed on 22 July 2013 Heard on 6 August 2013

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether GEO Developments Pty Ltd should be granted leave to amend its Defence and Cross-Summons shortly before the referee's hearing." 'Whether amendments particularising allegations against Rubikcon Pty Ltd and Geotech Testing Pty Ltd as concurrent wrongdoers should be allowed.' 'Whether GEO Developments Pty Ltd should be permitted to add Mepstead & Associates Pty Ltd as a further concurrent wrongdoer.' 'Whether the proposed amendments were made too late and would cause undue prejudice to the plaintiff.']

Ratio Decidendi

The amendments concerning Rubikcon and Geotech were allowed because GEO had already pleaded them as concurrent wrongdoers, the proposed amendments substantially provided particulars of existing allegations, the plaintiff was aware that concurrent wrongdoer liability was in issue, and expert material already addressed Geotech's role. The amendment adding Mepstead was refused because GEO had long had sufficient material to advance it, the amendment was sought shortly before the referee's hearing, and allowing it would require the plaintiff to consider joinder, additional evidence, expert work, documents, and a large volume of material, causing significant and unjustifiable distraction and...

Court Disposition

Amendments allowed in part

Orders

  • ['GEO was permitted to make the amendments proposed in par 51(b), par (d) and par (e) of the Further Amended Defence.' 'GEO was refused leave to make the amendments sought in par 51(f) of the Further Amended Defence.' 'Orders were to be made concerning the amendment to the Cross-Claim.']