Grasso v O’Connell [2024] NSWSC 1468

Grasso v O’Connell [2024] NSWSC 1468

Although the defendant’s defence was weak, it was not futile, and there is an arguable case on consideration regarding the forgiveness of the loan. Summary judgment is not appropriate where there is a triable issue as to consideration. Leave to amend the defence should be granted given the absence of prejudice or significant delay.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Philippa Jane Grasso; Second Plaintiff: Alison Rose Manton; Defendant: Geoffrey Charles O'Connell
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Motion—ruling on Amendment to Defence and Application for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's notice of motion dismissed; defendant granted leave to amend defence; costs ordered as specified
Legal Topics
Pleadings, Amendment of Defence, Summary Judgment, Judgment on Admissions
Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment of Defence Summary Judgment Judgment on Admissions

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philippa Jane Grasso

First Plaintiff

Alison Rose Manton

Second Plaintiff

Geoffrey Charles O'Connell

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Motion—ruling on Amendment to Defence and Application for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to amend the defence and withdraw admissions
  2. 2 Whether the defence, as amended, is futile or weak, in particular regarding consideration for loan forgiveness
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be granted based on admissions in the pleadings

Ratio Decidendi

Although the defendant’s defence was weak, it was not futile, and there is an arguable case on consideration regarding the forgiveness of the loan. Summary judgment is not appropriate where there is a triable issue as to consideration. Leave to amend the defence should be granted given the absence of prejudice or significant delay.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's notice of motion dismissed; defendant granted leave to amend defence; costs ordered as specified

Orders

  • The plaintiff's notice of motion filed on 22 July 2024 is dismissed.
  • The defendant has leave to file and serve an amended defence in the form annexed to the affidavit of Mr Nathan McEwen sworn 15 August 2024, within seven days.