Riva NSW Pty Ltd CAN 113 881 815 v Key Nominees Pty Ltd & Chris Stomo [2014] NSWSC 389

The pleading against Chris Stomo is embarrassing, prolix, and unclear, making it impossible for a party to adequately respond; given previous liberty to reformulate pleadings, and no substantial change in allegations, leave to replead is refused and the case against the second defendant is dismissed with costs.

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 21 March 2014
Procedural Posture: Strike Out Motion / Final Judgment
Outcome: Case dismissed against second defendant with costs
Legal Topics: ['pleadings' 'strike Out' 'contract' 'negligence' 'misleading Conduct']

['equity'] ['pleadings' 'strike Out' 'contract' 'negligence' 'misleading Conduct']

Source-derived case record

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1

Procedural Posture

Strike Out Motion / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the pleading against the second defendant is embarrassing and should be struck out' 'Whether leave to replead should be granted' 'Whether the facts alleged support claims in contract or negligence or misleading conduct']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Case dismissed against second defendant with costs

Orders

['Plaintiff to pay the second defendant’s costs' 'No fresh proceedings are to be commenced by the plaintiff on the same causes of action without leave of the court. That leave to be obtained prior to commencement of any fresh proceedings.']

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.