McCauley, M. v Hamilton Island Enterprises Pty Ltd & Ors [1987] FCA 290

McCauley, M. v Hamilton Island Enterprises Pty Ltd & Ors [1987] FCA 290

The plaintiff's pleading, while referring to the effect of relevant statutory provisions, does not embarrass the defendant since such references are necessary to state the nature of the claim. The pleading is not a bare allegation of law, but alleges facts relating to the creation of a common law duty of care in the context of statutory regulations. It is thus appropriate and proper for the pleader to both refer to and explain the relevant statutory provisions relied upon.

Parties
Plaintiff: Mark Bernard Everard McCauley; First Defendant: Hamilton Island Enterprises Pty. Limited; Second Defendant: Keith Williams (Queensland) Pty. Limited; Third Defendant: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority; Fourth Defendant: The Commonwealth of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 June 1987
Procedural Posture
Application to Strike Out Pleading / Interlocutory
Outcome
The motion to strike out is dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Pleadings, Striking Out Pleadings, Common Law Duty of Care, Statutory Interpretation
Practice and Procedure Pleadings Striking Out Pleadings Common Law Duty of Care Statutory Interpretation

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Bernard Everard McCauley

Plaintiff

Hamilton Island Enterprises Pty. Limited

First Defendant

Keith Williams (Queensland) Pty. Limited

Second Defendant

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority

Third Defendant

The Commonwealth of Australia

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Strike Out Pleading / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether paragraphs 15A to 150 (inclusive) of the plaintiff's further amended statement of claim are embarrassing because they plead matters of law rather than fact

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's pleading, while referring to the effect of relevant statutory provisions, does not embarrass the defendant since such references are necessary to state the nature of the claim. The pleading is not a bare allegation of law, but alleges facts relating to the creation of a common law duty of care in the context of statutory regulations. It is thus appropriate and proper for the pleader to both refer to and explain the relevant statutory provisions relied upon.

Court Disposition

The motion to strike out is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The third defendant's motion to strike out paragraphs 15A to 150 (inclusive) of the plaintiff's further amended statement of claim is dismissed.
  • The third defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs of the motion.