In the matter of Orix Australia Corporation Limited [2020] NSWSC 1770

In the matter of Orix Australia Corporation Limited [2020] NSWSC 1770

Paragraphs 57, 73, 110(a)-(b), 172(a)-(c) and 194 of the Statement of Claim are struck out because the use of the term 'illegitimate' is ambiguous and does not adequately disclose the basis for the claim. The strike out application in respect of other paragraphs fails as the challenged terms and allegations are either sufficiently clear, relevant, not so vague as to embarrass, or raise factual questions inappropriate for summary disposition.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Strike Out Application (civil Procedure) in Equity Corporations List / Interlocutory (decision on Motion to Strike Out Parts of Statement of Claim)
Outcome
Application granted in part; several paragraphs struck out with leave to replead; strike out refused on other paragraphs.
Legal Topics
['strike Out Application' 'pleadings' 'relevance of Criminal Charges' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' "breach of Directors' Duties" 'fiduciary Duty' 'internal Corporate Communications']
['civil Procedure' 'corporations Law' 'equity'] ['strike Out Application' 'pleadings' 'relevance of Criminal Charges' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' "breach of Directors' Duties" 'fiduciary Duty' 'internal Corporate Communications']

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

Strike Out Application (civil Procedure) in Equity Corporations List / Interlocutory (decision on Motion to Strike Out Parts of Statement of Claim)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether references to prior arrests and criminal charges should be struck out as irrelevant or embarrassing' "Whether use of terms such as 'illegitimate' in pleading is sufficiently precise or must be struck out" "Whether allegations involving communications between company officers and auditors can found a claim for misleading or deceptive conduct under s 18 of the Australian Consumer Law as conduct 'in trade or commerce'" 'Whether certain allegations are vague, ambiguous or otherwise embarrassing and should be struck out']

Ratio Decidendi

Paragraphs 57, 73, 110(a)-(b), 172(a)-(c) and 194 of the Statement of Claim are struck out because the use of the term 'illegitimate' is ambiguous and does not adequately disclose the basis for the claim. The strike out application in respect of other paragraphs fails as the challenged terms and allegations are either sufficiently clear, relevant, not so vague as to embarrass, or raise factual questions inappropriate for summary disposition.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; several paragraphs struck out with leave to replead; strike out refused on other paragraphs.

Orders

  • ['Paragraphs 57, 73, 110(a)-(b), 172(a)-(c), and 194 of Statement of Claim struck out with leave to replead consistent with judgment.' 'Strike out application unsuccessful on other paragraphs.' 'Parties to be heard on directions for filing an Amended Statement of Claim and on costs at next listing.']