Barkat v Bitel [2008] NSWSC 43

Barkat v Bitel [2008] NSWSC 43

Leave to amend was refused because the proposed amendment sought damages outside the legal measure available for negligence or breach of contract by legal advisers; such damages must reflect actual loss related to the transaction, not hypothetical profits from uncompleted development.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Motion / Ruling on Leave to Amend Statement of Claim
Outcome
Leave to amend refused. Motion dismissed. Costs awarded to defendants.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'measure of Damages' 'negligence by Legal Advisers']
['civil Procedure'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'measure of Damages' 'negligence by Legal Advisers']

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

Motion / Ruling on Leave to Amend Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to amend the statement of claim to include new claims for damages' 'Whether the proposed amendment seeks damages outside the applicable legal measure']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend was refused because the proposed amendment sought damages outside the legal measure available for negligence or breach of contract by legal advisers; such damages must reflect actual loss related to the transaction, not hypothetical profits from uncompleted development.

Court Disposition

Leave to amend refused. Motion dismissed. Costs awarded to defendants.

Orders

  • ['Leave to amend the statement of claim is refused.' 'Motion dismissed.' "Plaintiffs to pay defendants' costs of the motion."]