Sereika v Cardinal Financial Securities Ltd [2001] FCA 208

Sereika v Cardinal Financial Securities Ltd [2001] FCA 208

The Amended Application and Amended Statement of Claim do not comply with s 33H of the Federal Court of Australia Act (1976) and Federal Court Rules in that they fail to adequately describe the group, specify claims and relief, and set out common questions of law or fact. Further, the pleadings do not adequately plead material facts, or the relationship between alleged duties, breaches and losses, making it impossible for respondents to answer. Accordingly, the pleadings must be struck out, but leave to replead is granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceeding (class Action) / Interlocutory (application to Strike Out Pleadings)
Outcome
Amended Application and Amended Statement of Claim struck out with costs; leave to replead granted
Legal Topics
['representative Proceedings' 'striking Out Pleadings' 'pleading Requirements']
['civil Procedure'] ['representative Proceedings' 'striking Out Pleadings' 'pleading Requirements']

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

Representative Proceeding (class Action) / Interlocutory (application to Strike Out Pleadings)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Amended Application and Amended Statement of Claim comply with the requirements for representative proceedings under s 33H of the Federal Court of Australia Act (1976) and the Federal Court Rules' 'Whether the pleadings adequately set out material facts, correlation between duties, breaches and damage, and common questions of law or fact' 'Whether the claims as pleaded fall within federal jurisdiction']

Ratio Decidendi

The Amended Application and Amended Statement of Claim do not comply with s 33H of the Federal Court of Australia Act (1976) and Federal Court Rules in that they fail to adequately describe the group, specify claims and relief, and set out common questions of law or fact. Further, the pleadings do not adequately plead material facts, or the relationship between alleged duties, breaches and losses, making it impossible for respondents to answer. Accordingly, the pleadings must be struck out, but leave to replead is granted.

Court Disposition

Amended Application and Amended Statement of Claim struck out with costs; leave to replead granted

Orders

  • ['The Motions to strike out the Amended Application and Amended Statement of Claim are allowed with costs.' 'Leave is granted to the Applicant to file and serve within six (6) weeks a Further Amended Application and Further Amended Statement of Claim.']