Carroll v Thompson (No 3) [2014] NSWDC 98

Carroll v Thompson (No 3) [2014] NSWDC 98

The evidence established the true owners and intended defendants were Stephen George Thompson and Jeffrey Laurence Thompson. The mistake in the original statement of claim was not misleading nor did it cause reasonable doubt as to the intended parties. Accordingly, leave was granted to amend the statement of claim under s 64(1)(b) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Amend Statement of Claim
Outcome
Leave granted to amend statement of claim.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'limitation Periods' 'personal Service']

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

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Amend Statement of Claim

  1. 1 ["Whether leave should be granted to amend the statement of claim to correct defendants' names after expiration of the limitation period" 'Whether the mistake in defendants’ names was misleading or gave rise to reasonable doubt as to the identity of the defendants']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence established the true owners and intended defendants were Stephen George Thompson and Jeffrey Laurence Thompson. The mistake in the original statement of claim was not misleading nor did it cause reasonable doubt as to the intended parties. Accordingly, leave was granted to amend the statement of claim under s 64(1)(b) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).

Court Disposition

Leave granted to amend statement of claim.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to plaintiff to amend the statement of claim to substitute as defendants Stephen George Thompson and Jeffrey Laurence Thompson.']