GC Group Company Pty Ltd v Bingo Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 1360

GC Group Company Pty Ltd v Bingo Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 1360

It would be an abuse of process to permit Bingo to amend its pleading to name 710 vehicle owners as concurrent wrongdoers where it cannot plead that any one of them actually caused the plaintiff's loss. The mere identification of vehicle proprietors is not a sufficient factual basis to assert that any were responsible for the defective aggregate or for the delivery of contaminated waste. Without the ability to positively allege such causation, the proposed amendment must be refused.

Parties
Plaintiff: GC Group Company Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Bingo Holdings Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: Bingo Recycling Pty Ltd; Third Defendant: Bingo Waste Services Pty Ltd; Fourth Defendant: Wollongong Recycling (NSW) Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion (application to Amend Pleading) / Application for Leave to Amend Technology and Construction List Response
Outcome
Leave to amend Technology and Construction List Response refused; notice of motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
Pleading Requirements, Apportionable Claims, Proportionate Liability, Concurrent Wrongdoers, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Torts Contract Consumer Law Pleading Requirements Apportionable Claims Proportionate Liability Concurrent Wrongdoers +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GC Group Company Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Bingo Holdings Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Bingo Recycling Pty Ltd

Second Defendant

Bingo Waste Services Pty Ltd

Third Defendant

Wollongong Recycling (NSW) Pty Ltd

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion (application to Amend Pleading) / Application for Leave to Amend Technology and Construction List Response

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants (Bingo) should be granted leave to amend their Technology and Construction List Response to plead an apportionable liability defence by identifying 710 parties as concurrent wrongdoers.
  2. 2 Whether identifying a class of 710 alleged concurrent wrongdoers without pleading which one caused the plaintiff's loss or having a basis to do so is an abuse of process.
  3. 3 Whether it is necessary to plead that the plaintiff has a cause of action against a concurrent wrongdoer.

Ratio Decidendi

It would be an abuse of process to permit Bingo to amend its pleading to name 710 vehicle owners as concurrent wrongdoers where it cannot plead that any one of them actually caused the plaintiff's loss. The mere identification of vehicle proprietors is not a sufficient factual basis to assert that any were responsible for the defective aggregate or for the delivery of contaminated waste. Without the ability to positively allege such causation, the proposed amendment must be refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to amend Technology and Construction List Response refused; notice of motion dismissed.

Orders

  • The defendants' notice of motion of 31 July 2020 is dismissed.
  • Costs should follow the event, subject to any contrary submissions by 5.00 pm on 9 October 2020.