Finnegan v Washington [2020] FCA 601

Finnegan v Washington [2020] FCA 601

The applicant was granted leave to amend because the respondents did not oppose the amendments, but he had not shown a reason to depart from the usual rule on costs thrown away. The existing pleading did not identify with clarity to whom publication was alleged to have been made, the respondents' concerns about publication were legitimate, and the pleading was not shown to be broadly satisfactory. Accordingly, the applicant had to pay the respondents' costs thrown away by reason of the amendments, if any.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceeding; Costs on Amendment of Statement of Claim / Application for Leave to File an Amended Statement of Claim, Determined on the Papers
Outcome
Leave to file the amended statement of claim was granted; the applicant was ordered to pay the respondents' costs thrown away by reason of the amendments, if any.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleading' 'costs Thrown Away' 'publication in Defamation' 'pleading Requirements']
['costs' 'defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['amendment of Pleading' 'costs Thrown Away' 'publication in Defamation' 'pleading Requirements']

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

Defamation Proceeding; Costs on Amendment of Statement of Claim / Application for Leave to File an Amended Statement of Claim, Determined on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should have leave to file the proposed amended statement of claim.' "Whether the applicant should pay the respondents' costs thrown away by reason of the amendments, or whether those costs should be costs in the cause." 'Whether there was reason to depart from the usual practice that a party seeking the indulgence of an amendment to a pleading pays the costs thrown away by reason of that amendment.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was granted leave to amend because the respondents did not oppose the amendments, but he had not shown a reason to depart from the usual rule on costs thrown away. The existing pleading did not identify with clarity to whom publication was alleged to have been made, the respondents' concerns about publication were legitimate, and the pleading was not shown to be broadly satisfactory. Accordingly, the applicant had to pay the respondents' costs thrown away by reason of the amendments, if any.

Court Disposition

Leave to file the amended statement of claim was granted; the applicant was ordered to pay the respondents' costs thrown away by reason of the amendments, if any.

Orders

  • ['The applicant has leave to file an amended statement of claim in the same form as the minute of proposed amended statement of claim that the applicant emailed to the Court on 25 March 2020.' "The applicant must pay the respondents' costs thrown away by reason of the amendments, if any."]