Watiwat v Dixon (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 1242

Watiwat v Dixon (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 1242

The plaintiff was refused leave to file a further amended statement of claim as the pleading again failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action, did not plead facts establishing an entitlement to relief, improperly claimed damages, and lacked standing to sue for the administration of his wife's bankruptcy. The defendants were granted leave to amend their notice of motion to seek dismissal under rule 13.4. The proceedings were dismissed as there was no operative pleading on file disclosing any valid claim. The court declined to bar the plaintiff from commencing future proceedings, finding insufficient basis to do so under the court's inherent jurisdiction or statutory provisions, and...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Judgment and Dismissal
Outcome
Plaintiff's application to amend denied; defendants' application to amend granted; proceedings dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Applications' 'summary Disposal' 'pleading Requirements' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'abuse of Process']
['civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['interlocutory Applications' 'summary Disposal' 'pleading Requirements' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'abuse of Process']

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

Civil / Interlocutory Judgment and Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to file a further amended statement of claim' 'Whether the defendants should be granted leave to amend their notice of motion' 'Whether the proceedings should be dismissed for failure to disclose a reasonable cause of action' 'Whether the plaintiff should be barred from instituting fresh proceedings without leave of the court']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was refused leave to file a further amended statement of claim as the pleading again failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action, did not plead facts establishing an entitlement to relief, improperly claimed damages, and lacked standing to sue for the administration of his wife's bankruptcy. The defendants were granted leave to amend their notice of motion to seek dismissal under rule 13.4. The proceedings were dismissed as there was no operative pleading on file disclosing any valid claim. The court declined to bar the plaintiff from commencing future proceedings, finding insufficient basis to do so under the court's inherent jurisdiction or statutory provisions, and...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application to amend denied; defendants' application to amend granted; proceedings dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff's application for leave to file a further amended statement of claim is denied." "The defendant's application to amend its notice of motion dated 24 July 2017 is allowed." 'The proceedings are dismissed pursuant to rule 13.4 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).' "The plaintiff is to pay...