Great Scott International Pty Ltd v Cosmetic Suppliers Pty Ltd [2004] NSWIRComm 139

Great Scott International Pty Ltd v Cosmetic Suppliers Pty Ltd [2004] NSWIRComm 139

The proposed amendment sought to add a person who had not previously made an application for an order under s 106. That was materially different from adding respondents to an existing applicant's claim and was so substantial and of such a nature as to be characterised as a new application caught by s 108B. Because s 108B operated from 24 June 2002 and the proposed amended application fell within it, the application to amend was incompetent and had to be dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Interlocutory Judgment on Application to Join Additional Applicant
Outcome
Application to amend the summons dismissed.
Legal Topics
['unfair Contracts' 'amendment of Summons' 'joinder of Additional Applicant' 'time Limit Under S 108 B' 'jurisdiction']
['industrial Relations' 'civil Procedure'] ['unfair Contracts' 'amendment of Summons' 'joinder of Additional Applicant' 'time Limit Under S 108 B' 'jurisdiction']

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

Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Interlocutory Judgment on Application to Join Additional Applicant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it was appropriate at the interlocutory stage to determine whether the contract or arrangement in the proposed amended summons was identical with the contract or arrangement in the original summons and whether the proposed additional applicant was a party to it.' 'Whether adding an additional applicant to s 106 proceedings constituted a fresh application for the purposes of s 108B of the Industrial Relations Act 1996.' 'Whether s 108B operated so as to preclude the proposed amended application.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amendment sought to add a person who had not previously made an application for an order under s 106. That was materially different from adding respondents to an existing applicant's claim and was so substantial and of such a nature as to be characterised as a new application caught by s 108B. Because s 108B operated from 24 June 2002 and the proposed amended application fell within it, the application to amend was incompetent and had to be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application to amend the summons dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application to amend the summons is dismissed.' 'Costs are reserved.' 'Liberty to apply previously ordered continues.']