Li v Zhu [2024] NSWSC 270

Li v Zhu [2024] NSWSC 270

Leave to file and serve the further amended statement of claim was granted because the only contested amendment was deletion of paragraph 34, there was no real prejudice to the defendants since any alleged admission could be dealt with by cross-examination or pleaded in the defence, and the asserted loss of confidence in the legal system was not persuasive where substantive amendments were consented to. Costs consequences were imposed because the plaintiff's delay and breach of court orders were not adequately explained.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment Application / Notice of Motion for Leave to File and Serve a Further Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Plaintiff granted leave to file and serve a further amended statement of claim; plaintiff to pay defendants' costs thrown away by the amendments; each party to pay its own costs of the notice of motion.
Legal Topics
['pleadings' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'leave to Amend' 'costs' 'admissions']
['civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['pleadings' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'leave to Amend' 'costs' '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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure Pleadings Amendment Application / Notice of Motion for Leave to File and Serve a Further Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should have leave to file and serve a further amended statement of claim deleting paragraph 34 of the amended statement of claim.' 'Whether deleting paragraph 34 would cause prejudice to the third, fourth, fifth and sixth defendants because they contended it was an admission against interest.' 'What costs orders should be made in light of the amendments, delay and breach of previous court orders.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to file and serve the further amended statement of claim was granted because the only contested amendment was deletion of paragraph 34, there was no real prejudice to the defendants since any alleged admission could be dealt with by cross-examination or pleaded in the defence, and the asserted loss of confidence in the legal system was not persuasive where substantive amendments were consented to. Costs consequences were imposed because the plaintiff's delay and breach of court orders were not adequately explained.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff granted leave to file and serve a further amended statement of claim; plaintiff to pay defendants' costs thrown away by the amendments; each party to pay its own costs of the notice of motion.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiff has leave to file and serve, within 14 days, a further amended statement of claim in the form annexed to the affidavit of Mr Abbas Soukie dated 21 November 2023.' "The plaintiff is to pay the defendants' costs thrown away by the whole of the amendments contained in the further amended statement of...