PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Roads and Maritime Services [2014] NSWSC 407

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Roads and Maritime Services [2014] NSWSC 407

The Crown defendants were not entitled to summary dismissal because the evidence did not show that the plaintiff's case that they carried on a business of buying and selling land, or that a pre-tender contract existed, was so clearly untenable that it should not go to trial. However, the statement of claim and proposed amended statement of claim inadequately pleaded essential material facts and particulars for the claims against the Crown defendants, including carrying on a business, causation and damage, negligence and estoppel, so the existing pleading was struck out so far as it related to the Crown defendants and leave was given to replead.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications / Plaintiff's Application for Leave to Amend Statement of Claim and Crown Defendants' Application for Summary Dismissal or Strike Out
Outcome
Summary dismissal refused; pleadings against the Crown defendants struck out; leave granted to file an amended statement of claim within 28 days; motions otherwise dismissed; costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['summary Dismissal' 'strike Out of Pleadings' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'crown Carrying on a Business' 'pre Tender Contract' 'pure Economic Loss' 'estoppel by Representation' 'leave to Amend']
['civil Procedure' 'consumer Law' 'contract Law' 'negligence' 'equity'] ['summary Dismissal' 'strike Out of Pleadings' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'crown Carrying on a Business' 'pre Tender Contract' 'pure Economic Loss' 'estoppel by Representation' 'leave to Amend']

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 / Plaintiff's Application for Leave to Amend Statement of Claim and Crown Defendants' Application for Summary Dismissal or Strike Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown defendants were entitled to summary dismissal of the statutory misleading or deceptive conduct claim on the basis that they were not carrying on a business when selling surplus land' 'Whether the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW), or the Australian Consumer Law applied to the alleged conduct' 'Whether the plaintiff had more than a fanciful prospect of establishing a pre-tender contract despite the tender conditions' 'Whether the existing and proposed pleadings adequately pleaded the Crown defendants carrying on a business, misleading or deceptive conduct, causation and damage, negligence, and estoppel by representation' 'Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to replead its claims against the Crown defendants']

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown defendants were not entitled to summary dismissal because the evidence did not show that the plaintiff's case that they carried on a business of buying and selling land, or that a pre-tender contract existed, was so clearly untenable that it should not go to trial. However, the statement of claim and proposed amended statement of claim inadequately pleaded essential material facts and particulars for the claims against the Crown defendants, including carrying on a business, causation and damage, negligence and estoppel, so the existing pleading was struck out so far as it related to the Crown defendants and leave was given to replead.

Court Disposition

Summary dismissal refused; pleadings against the Crown defendants struck out; leave granted to file an amended statement of claim within 28 days; motions otherwise dismissed; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ['Refuse summary dismissal in favour of the Crown defendants' 'Under Rule 14.28(1)(c) strike out the whole of the pleadings and particulars appearing in the statement of claim filed on 25th May 2012 so far as it relates to a claim against the State of New South Wales or any manifestation of the Crown in the right of...