Morris v Hanley [2000] NSWSC 513

Morris v Hanley [2000] NSWSC 513

Leave to amend a statement of claim may be granted even at a late stage if the amendments arise from substantially the same facts and are reasonably arguable, provided any prejudice to the other party is adequately remedied by costs, and, in this case, no uncured prejudice was established beyond what costs orders could address.

Parties
Plaintiff: Janine Morris; Defendant: Jack Norman Hanley; Defendant: Geoffrey Donald Reid; Defendant: Lynda Maree Cole; Defendant: Christine Valmae Hayward; Defendant: Anthony Bodycote; Defendant: Robyn Janelle Haydon; Defendant: Daphne Olive Boyd; Defendant: Beverley Joy Armfield; Defendant: Gayle Hanley; Defendant: Cecil Bellchambers; Defendant: Mariana Holdings Pty Limited; Cross Defendant: Malcolm Rodgers; Cross Defendant: State of New South Wales
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 May 2000
Procedural Posture
Application to Amend Statement of Claim / Interlocutory
Outcome
Leave to amend statement of claim granted, with costs orders against plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Costs, Statute of Limitations, Fiduciary Duties, Conspiracy
Equity Civil Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Costs Statute of Limitations Fiduciary Duties Conspiracy

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janine Morris

Plaintiff

Jack Norman Hanley

Defendant

Geoffrey Donald Reid

Defendant

Lynda Maree Cole

Defendant

Christine Valmae Hayward

Defendant

Anthony Bodycote

Defendant

Robyn Janelle Haydon

Defendant

Daphne Olive Boyd

Defendant

Beverley Joy Armfield

Defendant

Gayle Hanley

Defendant

Cecil Bellchambers

Defendant

Mariana Holdings Pty Limited

Defendant

Malcolm Rodgers

Cross Defendant

State of New South Wales

Cross Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Amend Statement of Claim / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted for the plaintiff to file a third amended statement of claim introducing new causes of action.
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendments are outside the limitation period and if they relate to substantially the same facts as those in the original claim.
  3. 3 Whether costs orders can adequately compensate defendants for prejudice arising from the late amendment.

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend a statement of claim may be granted even at a late stage if the amendments arise from substantially the same facts and are reasonably arguable, provided any prejudice to the other party is adequately remedied by costs, and, in this case, no uncured prejudice was established beyond what costs orders could address.

Court Disposition

Leave to amend statement of claim granted, with costs orders against plaintiff.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the plaintiff to file a third amended statement of claim.
  • The plaintiff is ordered to pay the defendants' costs of the application for leave to amend.