SIALEPIS v IRONAID PTY LTD AND ORS [1997] NSWCA 285

SIALEPIS v IRONAID PTY LTD AND ORS [1997] NSWCA 285

The application for amendment should be refused, as the proposed amendment introduces a completely new allegation unsupported by evidence, especially in circumstances where legal representatives have had repeated opportunities to formulate a claim.

Parties
Appellant: Mrs Sialepis; Respondent: Ironaid Pty Ltd; Respondent: Mr Cosco; Respondent: Mrs Cosco
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 November 1997
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application to Amend Pleadings During Appeal
Outcome
application for amendment refused
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Dismissal of Claims
Civil Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Dismissal of Claims

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Sialepis

Appellant

Ironaid Pty Ltd

Respondent

Mr Cosco

Respondent

Mrs Cosco

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application to Amend Pleadings During Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to further amend the Further Amended Summons during the appeal against dismissal of claims
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendment relating to the Cronulla property is supported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The application for amendment should be refused, as the proposed amendment introduces a completely new allegation unsupported by evidence, especially in circumstances where legal representatives have had repeated opportunities to formulate a claim.

Court Disposition

application for amendment refused

Orders

  • Application to amend the Further Amended Summons refused