Tada Constructions Corporation Pty Ltd v JP Dixon Real Estate Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 703

Tada Constructions Corporation Pty Ltd v JP Dixon Real Estate Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 703

The applicant’s particulars of loss and damage were inadequate and failed to give sufficient detail or calculations for the respondents to know the case they must meet, prepare evidence, and instruct an expert. This justified ordering further and better particulars or amendment, but did not warrant striking out the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Tada Constructions Corporation Pty Ltd (ACN 099 542 784); First Respondent: JP Dixon Real Estate Pty Ltd (ACN 005 514 992); Second Respondent: Jonathan Dixon
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Application (notice of Motion) Within Civil Proceeding / Interlocutory (application to Strike Out, for Particulars and Discovery)
Outcome
Further and better particulars or amendment ordered; costs against applicant
Legal Topics
Pleadings and Particulars, Further and Better Particulars, Discovery, Striking Out Pleadings, Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, Breach of Contract
Practice and Procedure Contract Law Trade Practices Pleadings and Particulars Further and Better Particulars Discovery Striking Out Pleadings Misleading and Deceptive Conduct +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tada Constructions Corporation Pty Ltd (ACN 099 542 784)

Applicant

JP Dixon Real Estate Pty Ltd (ACN 005 514 992)

First Respondent

Jonathan Dixon

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application (notice of Motion) Within Civil Proceeding / Interlocutory (application to Strike Out, for Particulars and Discovery)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amended statement of claim should be struck out for causing prejudice, embarrassment or delay
  2. 2 Whether further and better particulars of loss and damage should be provided
  3. 3 Whether particular discovery should be ordered

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant’s particulars of loss and damage were inadequate and failed to give sufficient detail or calculations for the respondents to know the case they must meet, prepare evidence, and instruct an expert. This justified ordering further and better particulars or amendment, but did not warrant striking out the pleading. Costs were awarded against the applicant for failure to adequately clarify the loss and damage claimed despite repeated requests.

Court Disposition

Further and better particulars or amendment ordered; costs against applicant

Orders

  • The applicant to provide further and better particulars to paragraphs 12 and 16 of the amended statement of claim dated 25 February 2011 by 4.00pm on 22 June 2011.
  • Alternatively, the applicant to file and serve a further amended statement of claim, including re-pleadings of paragraphs 12, 16, and 19, providing full particulars by 4.00pm on 22 June 2011.