Jones v Braund [2020] NSWDC 32

Jones v Braund [2020] NSWDC 32

Leave to amend was granted only to the extent that the amendments concerned genuine out-of-pocket expenses that were unobjectionable, including the reduced past out-of-pocket amount and the second category of future expense amendments. Leave was refused for items that were in substance legal costs and for the proposed Sydney Building Defects Inspections and Reports claim because the application was made late during trial, would likely require recall and further cross-examination, would prejudice the defendant by limiting the ability to investigate and test the claim, would likely cause delay and inefficient use of judicial resources, and the proposed claim appeared doubtful because it was...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Proceedings for Damages for Alleged Professional Negligence in Relation to Dental Treatment / Interlocutory Application During Trial to Further Amend Amended Statement of Particulars
Outcome
Application to further amend the amended statement of particulars allowed in part and refused in part.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Statement of Particulars' 'application Made During Hearing' 'overriding Purpose' 'efficient Use of Judicial Resources' 'out of Pocket Expenses' 'legal Costs of Self Represented Litigant' 'third Party Employer Costs']
['practice and Procedure' 'costs' 'civil Procedure' 'professional Negligence' 'personal Injury'] ['amendment of Statement of Particulars' 'application Made During Hearing' 'overriding Purpose' 'efficient Use of Judicial Resources' 'out of Pocket Expenses' 'legal Costs of Self Represented Litigant' 'third Party Employer 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

Civil Proceedings for Damages for Alleged Professional Negligence in Relation to Dental Treatment / Interlocutory Application During Trial to Further Amend Amended Statement of Particulars

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave under s 64 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) to further amend his amended statement of particulars during trial.' 'Whether proposed items described as out-of-pocket expenses were in substance recoverable legal costs.' 'Whether the plaintiff could amend to claim amounts referable to Sydney Building Defects Inspections and Reports for his time preparing for and attending the trial.' 'Whether the proposed amendments would cause delay, prejudice to the defendant, or inefficient use of judicial resources.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend was granted only to the extent that the amendments concerned genuine out-of-pocket expenses that were unobjectionable, including the reduced past out-of-pocket amount and the second category of future expense amendments. Leave was refused for items that were in substance legal costs and for the proposed Sydney Building Defects Inspections and Reports claim because the application was made late during trial, would likely require recall and further cross-examination, would prejudice the defendant by limiting the ability to investigate and test the claim, would likely cause delay and inefficient use of judicial resources, and the proposed claim appeared doubtful because it was...

Court Disposition

Application to further amend the amended statement of particulars allowed in part and refused in part.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiff was allowed to amend to include item C for past out-of-pocket expenses in the sum of $30,683.82.' 'The plaintiff was refused leave to amend to include items F and G and other items D, E, H and I to the extent they amounted to payments made to legal representatives to assist with preparation and...