Porter v OAMPS Ltd [2005] FCA 232

Porter v OAMPS Ltd [2005] FCA 232

Certain claims in the draft statement of claim do not disclose a reasonable cause of action, are untenable, and cannot be re-pleaded to cure the defects—namely, the claim for a declaration that the applicant did not breach s 205 of the Corporations Law, the claim for malicious prosecution and conspiracy against the ninth respondent, the claim for damages against the second and third respondents based on s 615, and the claim against ASIC for breach of statutory duty. These claims should be dismissed. The amended statement of claim is otherwise so inadequate as to warrant being struck out, but the applicant should be granted leave to file a further statement of claim on the remaining causes...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications in a Civil Proceeding / Judgment on Interlocutory Applications Related to Pleadings (amendment, Strike Out and Dismissal)
Outcome
Certain claims dismissed; otherwise statement of claim struck out with leave to re-plead; leave to amend refused; applications on jurisdiction, transfer, and joinder adjourned sine die.
Legal Topics
['pleadings and Amendment' 'malicious Prosecution' 'misfeasance in Public Office' 'conspiracy' 'breach of Statutory Duty' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'jurisdiction' 'strike Out Applications']
['practice and Procedure' 'corporations Law' 'torts'] ['pleadings and Amendment' 'malicious Prosecution' 'misfeasance in Public Office' 'conspiracy' 'breach of Statutory Duty' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'jurisdiction' 'strike Out Applications']

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 in a Civil Proceeding / Judgment on Interlocutory Applications Related to Pleadings (amendment, Strike Out and Dismissal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether certain claims in the proposed amended statement of claim disclose a reasonable cause of action and are tenable or arguable' 'Whether particular claims (malicious prosecution, conspiracy, breach of statutory duty, etc.) against various respondents should be struck out or dismissed' 'Whether leave should be granted to re-plead or amend parts of the statement of claim' 'Whether this Court has jurisdiction and whether the proceedings should be transferred']

Ratio Decidendi

Certain claims in the draft statement of claim do not disclose a reasonable cause of action, are untenable, and cannot be re-pleaded to cure the defects—namely, the claim for a declaration that the applicant did not breach s 205 of the Corporations Law, the claim for malicious prosecution and conspiracy against the ninth respondent, the claim for damages against the second and third respondents based on s 615, and the claim against ASIC for breach of statutory duty. These claims should be dismissed. The amended statement of claim is otherwise so inadequate as to warrant being struck out, but the applicant should be granted leave to file a further statement of claim on the remaining causes...

Court Disposition

Certain claims dismissed; otherwise statement of claim struck out with leave to re-plead; leave to amend refused; applications on jurisdiction, transfer, and joinder adjourned sine die.

Orders

  • ['The following claims are dismissed pursuant to O 20 r 2 of the Federal Court Rules: (i) Declaration that applicant did not breach s 205 of the Corporations Law; (ii) claim of malicious prosecution and conspiracy against the ninth respondent; (iii) claim for damages against second and third respondents based on s...