Hardcastle v Santos Limited [2017] NSWDC 137

Hardcastle v Santos Limited [2017] NSWDC 137

Mr Hardcastle's Second Amended Statement of Claim fails to disclose any reasonable cause of action as all claims (misleading conduct, nuisance, unconscionable conduct) are manifestly untenable; alleged misrepresentations are either statute-barred, lack causative link, not made in trade or commerce, or unsupported by evidence. No actionable nuisance or unconscionable conduct is established, and claims for misleading conduct towards government are not made in trade or commerce. Accordingly, the statement of claim is struck out and costs ordered against the plaintiff.

Parties
Plaintiff: Philip Julian Hardcastle; First Defendant: Santos Limited; Second Defendant: Santos NSW Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Dismissal/strike Out Application
Outcome
Second Amended Statement of Claim struck out; costs ordered against plaintiff; defendants granted liberty to apply for special costs order.
Legal Topics
Nuisance, Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, Strike Out Application, Summary Dismissal
Civil Procedure Nuisance Misleading and Deceptive Conduct Strike Out Application Summary Dismissal

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 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philip Julian Hardcastle

Plaintiff

Santos Limited

First Defendant

Santos NSW Pty Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Summary Dismissal/strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Second Amended Statement of Claim discloses a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the claims for misleading and deceptive conduct are statute-barred or manifestly untenable
  3. 3 Whether there is evidence of actionable nuisance

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Hardcastle's Second Amended Statement of Claim fails to disclose any reasonable cause of action as all claims (misleading conduct, nuisance, unconscionable conduct) are manifestly untenable; alleged misrepresentations are either statute-barred, lack causative link, not made in trade or commerce, or unsupported by evidence. No actionable nuisance or unconscionable conduct is established, and claims for misleading conduct towards government are not made in trade or commerce. Accordingly, the statement of claim is struck out and costs ordered against the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Second Amended Statement of Claim struck out; costs ordered against plaintiff; defendants granted liberty to apply for special costs order.

Orders

  • Defendants' notice of motion filed 21 February 2017 granted.
  • The Second Amended Statement of Claim be struck out pursuant to r 14.28 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 on the basis that no reasonable cause of action is disclosed.