Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Ltd v Abdelkodous [2014] NSWSC 633

Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Ltd v Abdelkodous [2014] NSWSC 633

Leave granted to Plaintiff and Fourth Defendant to amend pleadings due to lack of prejudice and in the interests of justice, but Fourth Defendant not permitted to withdraw deemed admissions as no sufficient explanation was provided for their original making or proposed withdrawal.

Parties
Plaintiff: Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Ltd; First Defendant: John Abdelkodous; Second Defendant: Nadia Abdelkodous; Third Defendant: Combined Home Loans Pty Ltd; Fourth Defendant: Karl Damien; Fifth Defendant: Victor Abdelkodous; Sixth Defendant: George Shad t/as Shad Partners; Seventh Defendant: Peter Pitson t/as Asset Conveyancing Enterprises; Cross Defendant: Registrar-General (Cross-Defendant)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Post Directions, Pre Trial Interlocutory Orders
Outcome
Interlocutory orders made
Legal Topics
Pleadings, Amendment of Pleadings, Withdrawal of Admissions, Case Management
Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment of Pleadings Withdrawal of Admissions Case Management

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Ltd

Plaintiff

John Abdelkodous

First Defendant

Nadia Abdelkodous

Second Defendant

Combined Home Loans Pty Ltd

Third Defendant

Karl Damien

Fourth Defendant

Victor Abdelkodous

Fifth Defendant

George Shad t/as Shad Partners

Sixth Defendant

Peter Pitson t/as Asset Conveyancing Enterprises

Seventh Defendant

Registrar-General (Cross-Defendant)

Cross Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Post Directions, Pre Trial Interlocutory Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Plaintiff and Fourth Defendant should have leave to amend pleadings at a late stage
  2. 2 Whether the Fourth Defendant may withdraw deemed admissions by amending Defence
  3. 3 Whether further amendments will prejudice trial or mediation dates

Ratio Decidendi

Leave granted to Plaintiff and Fourth Defendant to amend pleadings due to lack of prejudice and in the interests of justice, but Fourth Defendant not permitted to withdraw deemed admissions as no sufficient explanation was provided for their original making or proposed withdrawal.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory orders made

Orders

  • Leave granted to Plaintiff to file Fourth Further Amended Statement of Claim.
  • Plaintiff to file Fourth Further Amended Statement of Claim by 23 May 2014.