Singtel Optus v Almad [2013] NSWSC 1098

Singtel Optus v Almad [2013] NSWSC 1098

The Court found the substance of the admission was not clear and distinct due to ambiguity in pleading as to the scope of 'services actually provided.' Almad did not act unreasonably in seeking withdrawal, and no relevant prejudice to Optus was established. The balance of convenience favored granting leave to withdraw the admission.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Commercial Dispute / Application in Course of Final Hearing: Leave to Withdraw Admission
Outcome
Leave granted to withdraw admission.
Legal Topics
['pleadings' 'application to Amend' 'withdrawal of Admission']
['practice and Procedure'] ['pleadings' 'application to Amend' 'withdrawal of Admission']

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

Commercial Dispute / Application in Course of Final Hearing: Leave to Withdraw Admission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to withdraw an admission regarding implied contractual terms']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found the substance of the admission was not clear and distinct due to ambiguity in pleading as to the scope of 'services actually provided.' Almad did not act unreasonably in seeking withdrawal, and no relevant prejudice to Optus was established. The balance of convenience favored granting leave to withdraw the admission.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to withdraw admission.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to Almad to amend its Commercial List Response to the Further Amended Commercial List Statement by withdrawing para 19.1 and substituting a non-admission of para 18(a) of the FACLS.' 'Amended response to be filed and served by 5pm tomorrow.']