MindShare Communications Ltd v Orleans Investments Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 637

MindShare Communications Ltd v Orleans Investments Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 637

Leave to withdraw the admission was granted because the plaintiff gave precise evidence explaining how the mistaken admission came about, including evidence from the solicitor who drafted the pleading and the further account of the relevant conversation by Mr Patterson; no further explanation from the person who verified the pleading was necessary, the admission was narrow, and the defendants identified no prejudice from withdrawal even at the comparatively late stage.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Application to Withdraw an Admission in the Defence to Amended Cross Claim / Notice of Motion Filed 9 May 2007
Outcome
Leave granted to withdraw admission in defence to cross claim.
Legal Topics
['admissions' 'withdrawal of Admissions' 'pleadings' 'discretionary Considerations' 'costs']
['civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['admissions' 'withdrawal of Admissions' 'pleadings' 'discretionary Considerations' 'costs']

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

Application to Withdraw an Admission in the Defence to Amended Cross Claim / Notice of Motion Filed 9 May 2007

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to withdraw an admission in the defence to amended cross claim.' 'Whether the explanation for the making of the admission was a sensible one based on evidence of a solid and substantial character.' 'Whether any prejudice to the defendants was shown by reason of withdrawal of the admission.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to withdraw the admission was granted because the plaintiff gave precise evidence explaining how the mistaken admission came about, including evidence from the solicitor who drafted the pleading and the further account of the relevant conversation by Mr Patterson; no further explanation from the person who verified the pleading was necessary, the admission was narrow, and the defendants identified no prejudice from withdrawal even at the comparatively late stage.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to withdraw admission in defence to cross claim.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to the plaintiff to file on or before 21 June 2007 an amended defence to amended cross claim withdrawing the admission in particular (c) appended to paragraph 10 of the defence to amended cross claim.' "Order that there be no order as to the costs of the plaintiff's notice of motion filed 9 May 2007."...