Williamson v Elders Rural Services Australia Limited (No. 1) [2017] NSWSC 1644

Williamson v Elders Rural Services Australia Limited (No. 1) [2017] NSWSC 1644

The application to amend was refused because the same application to plead exemplary damages had already been rejected by Beech-Jones J, nothing in the evidence at the hearing altered the position, and the evidentiary hearing was complete so there was no basis, consistently with s.56 and case management considerations, to allow the further amendment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Application by Plaintiff to Amend Pleadings to Claim Exemplary Damages / At Conclusion of Evidence and Before Closing Addresses at Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Application by Plaintiff to amend Third Further Amended Statement of Claim is refused.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'exemplary Damages' 'case Management']
['practice and Procedure' 'civil Procedure'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'exemplary Damages' 'case Management']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application by Plaintiff to Amend Pleadings to Claim Exemplary Damages / At Conclusion of Evidence and Before Closing Addresses at Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Plaintiff should be granted leave to amend the Third Further Amended Statement of Claim to seek exemplary damages based on alleged fraud.' 'Whether the amendment should be refused where a previous application to plead exemplary damages had already been refused and the evidence at the hearing did not alter the position.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application to amend was refused because the same application to plead exemplary damages had already been rejected by Beech-Jones J, nothing in the evidence at the hearing altered the position, and the evidentiary hearing was complete so there was no basis, consistently with s.56 and case management considerations, to allow the further amendment.

Court Disposition

Application by Plaintiff to amend Third Further Amended Statement of Claim is refused.

Orders

  • ['The application is refused.']