Wride v Schulze [2004] FCA 281

Wride v Schulze [2004] FCA 281

The amended statement of claim had no real resemblance to a pleading, did not comply with the Federal Court Rules, and did not properly particularise allegations of fraud and conspiracy. On the material supplied by the applicant, even adopting the most cautious approach, there was no possibility that any reasonable...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Proceeding by Applicant Against Former Patent Attorneys Seeking Compensation and Reimbursement in Relation to Patent Rights and Services / Respondents' Amended Notice of Motion to Strike Out the Statement of Claim and Summarily Dismiss the Application
Outcome
Amended statement of claim struck out; applicant's application dismissed; applicant ordered to pay the respondents' costs.
Legal Topics
['strike Out for No Reasonable Cause of Action' 'summary Dismissal' 'pleading Fraud and Conspiracy' 'federal Court Rules']
['practice and Procedure' 'pleadings' 'summary Dismissal'] ['strike Out for No Reasonable Cause of Action' 'summary Dismissal' 'pleading Fraud and Conspiracy' 'federal Court Rules']

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

Proceeding by Applicant Against Former Patent Attorneys Seeking Compensation and Reimbursement in Relation to Patent Rights and Services / Respondents' Amended Notice of Motion to Strike Out the Statement of Claim and Summarily Dismiss the Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the amended statement of claim should be struck out under O 11 r 16 as disclosing no reasonable cause of action.' "Whether the applicant's application should be dismissed under O 20 r 2 for disclosing no reasonable cause of action."]

Ratio Decidendi

The amended statement of claim had no real resemblance to a pleading, did not comply with the Federal Court Rules, and did not properly particularise allegations of fraud and conspiracy. On the material supplied by the applicant, even adopting the most cautious approach, there was no possibility that any reasonable cause of action could be identified or made out, so the statement of claim was struck out and the application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Amended statement of claim struck out; applicant's application dismissed; applicant ordered to pay the respondents' costs.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to O 11 r 16 the amended statement of claim is struck out.' "Pursuant to O 20 r 2 the applicant's application is dismissed." "The applicant pay the respondents' costs including the costs ordered by the Full Court to be costs in the cause."]