McCardle v Johnson (No 2) [2022] FCA 168

McCardle v Johnson (No 2) [2022] FCA 168

The amended statement of claim was fundamentally deficient, failing to disclose any reasonable cause of action, being ambiguous, prolix, irrelevant, and scandalous. Claims for final relief in paragraphs 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 (annulment only), and 9 of the amended application were dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success. Applicant was granted leave to replead only in relation to certain remaining claims, conditional upon security for costs. An order for security for costs was appropriate given the conduct and impecuniosity of the applicant, despite norms against such orders for individuals, due to other compelling factors.

Parties
Applicant: Roxanne Marie McCardle; First Respondent: Gregg Robertson Johnson; Second Respondent: Inspector-General in Bankruptcy
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Civil Proceedings Concerning Bankruptcy and Compensation Claims / Determination of Summary Judgment, Strike Out, and Security for Costs Applications
Outcome
Claims for relief in paragraphs 2, 4, 5, 7 (fund compensation), 8 (annulment), and 9 dismissed; judgment entered for first respondent. Amended statement of claim struck out. Leave to replead confined remaining claims granted subject to conditions. Security for costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Strike Out of Pleadings, Security for Costs, Compensation in Bankruptcy, Annulment/discharge of Bankruptcy, Trustee Duties, Jurisdiction Under Bankruptcy Act
Bankruptcy Practice and Procedure Insolvency Summary Judgment Strike Out of Pleadings Security for Costs Compensation in Bankruptcy Annulment/discharge of Bankruptcy +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roxanne Marie McCardle

Applicant

Gregg Robertson Johnson

First Respondent

Inspector-General in Bankruptcy

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application in Civil Proceedings Concerning Bankruptcy and Compensation Claims / Determination of Summary Judgment, Strike Out, and Security for Costs Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amended statement of claim discloses reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment should be granted for certain claims
  3. 3 Whether leave to amend should be granted for remaining claims

Ratio Decidendi

The amended statement of claim was fundamentally deficient, failing to disclose any reasonable cause of action, being ambiguous, prolix, irrelevant, and scandalous. Claims for final relief in paragraphs 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 (annulment only), and 9 of the amended application were dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success. Applicant was granted leave to replead only in relation to certain remaining claims, conditional upon security for costs. An order for security for costs was appropriate given the conduct and impecuniosity of the applicant, despite norms against such orders for individuals, due to other compelling factors.

Court Disposition

Claims for relief in paragraphs 2, 4, 5, 7 (fund compensation), 8 (annulment), and 9 dismissed; judgment entered for first respondent. Amended statement of claim struck out. Leave to replead confined remaining claims granted subject to conditions. Security for costs ordered.

Orders

  • Claims for final relief in paragraphs 2, 4, 5 and 9 of the amended application filed 22 September 2021 dismissed, judgment entered for first respondent.
  • Claim for compensation for the fund in paragraph 7 of the amended application dismissed, judgment entered for first respondent.