Chemtieh v Atieler Hazzouri Architects Pty Ltd ACN 095725072 and CDC Certifiers Pty Ltd ACN 609740285 [2025] NSWDC 2

Chemtieh v Atieler Hazzouri Architects Pty Ltd ACN 095725072 and CDC Certifiers Pty Ltd ACN 609740285 [2025] NSWDC 2

The plaintiff's application to amend the Statement of Claim was refused because there was no adequate or timely explanation for the 16-month delay, the amendment would prejudice the defendants due to substantial prior costs and the need to re-address the case, and the fourth draft was defective, unclear, insufficiently particularised, and did not allow proper engagement by the defendants. The application to set aside the guillotine order was refused due to lack of adequate explanation or timely action.

Parties
Plaintiff: Karim Abdallah Chemtieh; First Defendant: Atieler Hazzouri Architects Pty Ltd ACN 095725072; Second Defendant: CDC Private Certifiers Pty Ltd ACN 609740285
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application to Amend Originating Process and Set Aside Guillotine Order
Outcome
Plaintiff's motion dismissed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Originating Process, Guillotine Orders, Extension of Time, Pleading Requirements
Civil Procedure Amendment of Originating Process Guillotine Orders Extension of Time 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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Karim Abdallah Chemtieh

Plaintiff

Atieler Hazzouri Architects Pty Ltd ACN 095725072

First Defendant

CDC Private Certifiers Pty Ltd ACN 609740285

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application to Amend Originating Process and Set Aside Guillotine Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to amend the Statement of Claim 16 months after filing
  2. 2 Whether the guillotine order concerning expert evidence service should be set aside

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's application to amend the Statement of Claim was refused because there was no adequate or timely explanation for the 16-month delay, the amendment would prejudice the defendants due to substantial prior costs and the need to re-address the case, and the fourth draft was defective, unclear, insufficiently particularised, and did not allow proper engagement by the defendants. The application to set aside the guillotine order was refused due to lack of adequate explanation or timely action.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's motion dismissed

Orders

  • The plaintiff's motion filed on 5 July 2024 is dismissed.