Northern Park Pty Ltd v Goulburn Mulwaree Council [2023] NSWSC 335

Northern Park Pty Ltd v Goulburn Mulwaree Council [2023] NSWSC 335

Leave to add the proposed fourth plaintiff was refused because the existing proceedings had been on foot since 2019, the proposed fourth plaintiff's claim could be treated as a separate suit, and it should not interfere with the delayed current proceedings. Leave to amend was granted for the bridging finance allegations only on the basis that the pleading identify with precision the parties involved, and to include unopposed paragraphs. Further evidence was permitted on a timetable, with directions to follow, and the plaintiffs were ordered to pay the defendant's costs occasioned by the amendments.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Seeking Leave to File a Further Amended Statement of Claim, Including Addition of a Fourth Plaintiff and New Heads of Damages / Procedural Ruling on Amendment and Joinder Application
Outcome
Application to join a fourth plaintiff rejected; leave granted to file a further amended statement of claim in limited terms; consequential evidence, directions and costs orders made.
Legal Topics
['commencement of Proceedings' 'statement of Claim' 'joinder of Parties' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'evidence by Affidavit' 'party/party Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['commencement of Proceedings' 'statement of Claim' 'joinder of Parties' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'evidence by Affidavit' 'party/party Costs']

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

Notice of Motion Seeking Leave to File a Further Amended Statement of Claim, Including Addition of a Fourth Plaintiff and New Heads of Damages / Procedural Ruling on Amendment and Joinder Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiffs should be granted leave to amend the statement of claim to add a proposed fourth plaintiff.' 'Whether allegations concerning bridging finance were sufficiently pleaded where the pleading referred to the "Corporate Group" rather than identifying the parties to the finance.' 'Whether the plaintiffs should be permitted to amend to extend the heads of damages and serve further evidence.' 'What costs order should be made in relation to the amendments.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to add the proposed fourth plaintiff was refused because the existing proceedings had been on foot since 2019, the proposed fourth plaintiff's claim could be treated as a separate suit, and it should not interfere with the delayed current proceedings. Leave to amend was granted for the bridging finance allegations only on the basis that the pleading identify with precision the parties involved, and to include unopposed paragraphs. Further evidence was permitted on a timetable, with directions to follow, and the plaintiffs were ordered to pay the defendant's costs occasioned by the amendments.

Court Disposition

Application to join a fourth plaintiff rejected; leave granted to file a further amended statement of claim in limited terms; consequential evidence, directions and costs orders made.

Orders

  • ['The application to join a fourth plaintiff is rejected.' 'The plaintiffs have leave to file a further amended statement of claim, within 14 days, which pleading is to identify with precision the parties involved in the Bridging Finance described in paragraphs 72K to 72O of the proposed pleading and include those...