DJZ Constructions Pty Ltd v Paul Pritchard trading as Pritchard Law Group [2009] NSWSC 151

DJZ Constructions Pty Ltd v Paul Pritchard trading as Pritchard Law Group [2009] NSWSC 151

In the unusual circumstances, the dictates of justice required leave to amend the defence because the plaintiff's late amendments raised damages claims concerning matters long known to both parties and the defendant's proposed response was relevant to the real issues, including causation. Refusing leave would not...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence Proceedings / Interlocutory Dispute During Hearing Concerning Leave to Amend Statement of Claim and Defence
Outcome
Leave granted to amend the statement of claim and defence; timetable fixed; hearing adjourned.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'leave to Amend Defence' 'case Management' 'dictates of Justice' 'adjournment' 'costs Prejudice']
['professional Negligence' 'civil Procedure'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'leave to Amend Defence' 'case Management' 'dictates of Justice' 'adjournment' 'costs Prejudice']

Source-derived case record

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

Professional Negligence Proceedings / Interlocutory Dispute During Hearing Concerning Leave to Amend Statement of Claim and Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendant required the Court's leave to rely on an amended defence after the plaintiff's further amended statement of claim." 'Whether leave to amend the defence should be granted under the Civil Procedure Act 2005 despite delay, prejudice and the likely need for adjournment.' 'Whether the plaintiff should also be granted leave to amend the statement of claim to rely on the February 2001 and August 2003 deeds raised in the amended defence.']

Ratio Decidendi

In the unusual circumstances, the dictates of justice required leave to amend the defence because the plaintiff's late amendments raised damages claims concerning matters long known to both parties and the defendant's proposed response was relevant to the real issues, including causation. Refusing leave would not remove the conflict and difficulties arising from the likely cross-examination. Justice also required granting the plaintiff leave to amend the statement of claim to rely on the February 2001 and August 2003 deeds, so that the defendant could not defend a negligence claim by alleging earlier negligence about which the plaintiff was unable to complain.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to amend the statement of claim and defence; timetable fixed; hearing adjourned.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to amend the statement of claim and defence.' 'A timetable was fixed for further preparation of the matter for hearing.' 'The hearing was adjourned to 10am on 4 May 2009.']