Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Jutsen (No 2) [2010] FCA 982

Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Jutsen (No 2) [2010] FCA 982

Leave to amend pleadings after evidence has closed may be granted where the amendment seeks to raise a real question in dispute, there is no demonstrated prejudice to the other party, and the amendment is made in good faith, particularly where the factual basis is already before the court. In this case, the amendments related to the identification of the relevant pyramid selling scheme and did not alter the factual substratum of the case. As there was no evidence of prejudice to the respondents and the amendment was made in good faith, leave to amend should be granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Application (civil) / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Amend Pleadings After Evidence Closed
Outcome
Leave to amend granted
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'pyramid Selling Scheme' 'leave to Amend After Close of Evidence']
['practice and Procedure' 'competition and Consumer Law'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'pyramid Selling Scheme' 'leave to Amend After Close of Evidence']

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

Application (civil) / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Amend Pleadings After Evidence Closed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to the applicant to further amend the statement of claim and application after the evidence has closed' 'Whether the respondents would suffer prejudice if leave to amend is granted' 'Relevant considerations in allowing amendments to pleadings at a late stage']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend pleadings after evidence has closed may be granted where the amendment seeks to raise a real question in dispute, there is no demonstrated prejudice to the other party, and the amendment is made in good faith, particularly where the factual basis is already before the court. In this case, the amendments related to the identification of the relevant pyramid selling scheme and did not alter the factual substratum of the case. As there was no evidence of prejudice to the respondents and the amendment was made in good faith, leave to amend should be granted.

Court Disposition

Leave to amend granted

Orders

  • ['The applicant is given leave to file the proposed Further Amended Statement of Claim.' 'The applicant is given leave to file the proposed Second Further Amended Application.' 'The applicant is to pay the respondents their costs of and incidental to the amendment application including the costs of the additional...