John Holland Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2010] FCA 1095

John Holland Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2010] FCA 1095

The impugned paragraphs of the first respondent's defence, by specific denial or non-admission, sufficiently put the relevant allegations in issue and informed the applicant of the matters it had to prove at trial. The first respondent was not required to plead reasons or facts supporting its denials or non-admissions merely because the applicant considered the matters capable of admission or denial, and any unpleaded positive case would not ordinarily be available at trial.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure Pleadings / Applicant's Notice of Motion to Strike Out Paragraphs of the First Respondent's Defence
Outcome
The applicant's notice of motion was dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['strike Out Application' 'defence' 'specific Denial' 'specific Non Admission' 'admissions and Traverse']
['practice and Procedure' 'pleadings' 'fair Work'] ['strike Out Application' 'defence' 'specific Denial' 'specific Non Admission' 'admissions and Traverse']

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

Practice and Procedure Pleadings / Applicant's Notice of Motion to Strike Out Paragraphs of the First Respondent's Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether paragraphs 1.5, 1.10, 6, 8.2, 8.3, 9, 18 and 20 of the first respondent's defence should be struck out on the basis that they contained bare denials and non-admissions." 'Whether the first respondent was required to plead reasons or particulars for its denials or non-admissions of allegations in the statement of claim.']

Ratio Decidendi

The impugned paragraphs of the first respondent's defence, by specific denial or non-admission, sufficiently put the relevant allegations in issue and informed the applicant of the matters it had to prove at trial. The first respondent was not required to plead reasons or facts supporting its denials or non-admissions merely because the applicant considered the matters capable of admission or denial, and any unpleaded positive case would not ordinarily be available at trial.

Court Disposition

The applicant's notice of motion was dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's notice of motion to strike out the first respondent's defence, dated 16 June 2010, be dismissed." "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of the motion."]