Pacific National (ACT) Limited (ACN 48 052 134 362) v Queensland Rail (ABN 47 564 947 264) [2005] FCA 958
The proposed amendments were refused because there was no evidence that PN ever intended or intends in the future to acquire an alternative terminal; therefore, the amendments relating to such detriment were found to be futile and irrelevant.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 08 July 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Application to Amend Statement of Claim / Interlocutory
- Outcome
- Leave to amend the statement of claim refused in part, granted in part; costs awarded against applicant.
- Legal Topics
- ['amendment of Pleadings' 'estoppel' 'detriment' 'costs']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application to Amend Statement of Claim / Interlocutory
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to amend the statement of claim to introduce additional pleaded detriments' 'Whether the amendments are relevant and supported by evidence']
Ratio Decidendi
The proposed amendments were refused because there was no evidence that PN ever intended or intends in the future to acquire an alternative terminal; therefore, the amendments relating to such detriment were found to be futile and irrelevant.
Court Disposition
Leave to amend the statement of claim refused in part, granted in part; costs awarded against applicant.
Orders
- ['Leave is refused to amend the Third Further Amended Statement of Claim to add those portions of paragraphs 62(c), 68(c) and 70A(c) which the applicant sought to introduce in the Fourth Further Amended Statement of Claim.' 'Leave is granted to amend the Third Further Amended Statement of Claim, as contained in the...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment