Smith v Steve Mace Building Services P/L, Helen Stronach Architects P/L & Reid [2012] NSWDC 196

Smith v Steve Mace Building Services P/L, Helen Stronach Architects P/L & Reid [2012] NSWDC 196

The claims for strike out and security for costs failed because the cross claims were found to be at least arguably maintainable on the pleadings and facts, and insufficient evidence was provided to justify security for costs against the builder; leave to amend the cross claim and variations to case management orders were allowed in the interests of justice and efficient case management.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications / Ruling on Four Notices of Motion Including Strike Out Applications, Security for Costs, and Variation of Case Management Orders
Outcome
All strike out applications and security for costs applications dismissed; case management orders varied; mediation directed.
Legal Topics
['strike Out of Cross Claim' 'security for Costs' 'variation of Case Management Orders']
['practice and Procedure' 'building and Construction Law'] ['strike Out of Cross Claim' 'security for Costs' 'variation of Case Management Orders']

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

Interlocutory Applications / Ruling on Four Notices of Motion Including Strike Out Applications, Security for Costs, and Variation of Case Management Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether strike out of cross claims justified against architect and painter' 'Whether security for costs orders should be made against builder' 'Whether previous case management orders should be varied']

Ratio Decidendi

The claims for strike out and security for costs failed because the cross claims were found to be at least arguably maintainable on the pleadings and facts, and insufficient evidence was provided to justify security for costs against the builder; leave to amend the cross claim and variations to case management orders were allowed in the interests of justice and efficient case management.

Court Disposition

All strike out applications and security for costs applications dismissed; case management orders varied; mediation directed.

Orders

  • ["Architect's notice of motion seeking dismissal of cross claim and security for costs dismissed; liberty to apply for further orders including for costs if required." "Painter's notice of motion seeking dismissal of cross claim dismissed except that builder to reply to particulars request by 2 November 2012;...