Marshall v Prescott (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 1254

Marshall v Prescott (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 1254

Leave to amend the statement of claim post-hearing should be refused for amendments introducing new allegations where there is no adequate explanation for delay, potential prejudice to the opposing party, and resultant cost and delay, particularly when the litigation is at an advanced stage and all parties have previously conducted their cases on the existing pleadings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Post Trial Amendment Application
Outcome
Amendments allowed in part and refused in part; costs orders made against plaintiffs; directions for further amended statement of claim and submissions.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'costs' 'issue Estoppel' 'breach of Fiduciary Duty' 'confidential Information']
['practice and Procedure'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'costs' 'issue Estoppel' 'breach of Fiduciary Duty' 'confidential Information']

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

Interlocutory Application / Post Trial Amendment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to amend the amended statement of claim after the hearing has concluded' 'Whether certain proposed amendments constitute new allegations, and if so, whether it is appropriate to allow them at this late stage' 'Implications of amendments on procedural fairness, delay, and costs']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend the statement of claim post-hearing should be refused for amendments introducing new allegations where there is no adequate explanation for delay, potential prejudice to the opposing party, and resultant cost and delay, particularly when the litigation is at an advanced stage and all parties have previously conducted their cases on the existing pleadings.

Court Disposition

Amendments allowed in part and refused in part; costs orders made against plaintiffs; directions for further amended statement of claim and submissions.

Orders

  • ['Plaintiffs directed to file and serve a further amended statement of claim reflecting the allowed and disallowed amendments by 5pm on 6 September 2013.' 'Defendants to file and serve any further submissions in response by 5pm on 20 September 2013.' 'Plaintiffs to file and serve final submissions in reply by 4...