CURTIN v UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES & ORS [2009] NSWSC 269

The plaintiff's proposed amendments repeat claims previously struck out, do not allege conduct 'in trade or commerce', and fail to plead sufficient material facts showing causation or reliance; therefore, leave to amend is refused.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 09 April 2009
Procedural Posture: Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Amend Statement of Claim
Outcome: Application to amend statement of claim refused.
Legal Topics: ['amendment of Pleadings' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'trade and Commerce' 'causation' 'civil Procedure']

['practice and Procedure' 'contract Law' 'employment Law'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'trade and Commerce' 'causation' 'civil Procedure']

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

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Amend Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether leave should be granted to amend the Amended Statement of Claim to plead causes of action for misleading or deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct under s.42 and s.43 of the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW)' "Whether the alleged conduct occurred 'in trade or commerce' within the meaning of the Fair Trading Act" 'Whether the pleading discloses sufficient material facts to establish reliance and causation' 'Whether proposed amendments are futile or would prejudice the defendants']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application to amend statement of claim refused.

Orders

['Application for leave to amend the Amended Statement of Claim is dismissed.' 'Leave to amend the Amended Statement of Claim is refused.']