The Owners-Strata Plan 91349 v Hallmark Construction Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 591

The Owners-Strata Plan 91349 v Hallmark Construction Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 591

The pleaded causes of action were expressed in conclusory terms, lacked necessary factual particulars, failed to distinctly plead factual foundations for duties, breaches and causation, and were embarrassing. The relevant paragraphs should be struck out but the plaintiff should have leave to apply to re-plead by notice of motion.

Parties
Plaintiff: The Owners-Strata Plan 91349; First Defendant: Hallmark Construction Pty Ltd (ACN 066 609 729); Second Defendant: Raymond Michael Raad; Third Defendant: Anthony Bruce Crane; Fourth Defendant: Raad Holdings Pty Ltd (ACN 079 065 124); Fifth Defendant: PNT Group Pty Ltd (ACN 165 795 602) ATF PNT Family Trust (ABN 50 650 103 404) t/as New Style Aluminium; Sixth Defendant: George Khalil & Associates Pty Ltd (ACN 098 851 211) ATF George Khalil Family Trust (ABN 44 936 164 688) t/as ACSES Engineers; Seventh Defendant: Duro Building Construction Pty Ltd (ACN 092 138 835); Eighth Defendant: FB Masonry Pty Ltd (ACN 113 140 195); Ninth Defendant: Mance Arraj Engineering Pty Ltd (ACN 153 123 865) ATF Mance Arraj Engineering Unit Trust (ABN 58 244 208 422) t/as HKMA Engineers; Tenth Defendant: Certified Building Specialists Pty Ltd (ACN 151 732 928); Eleventh Defendant: Kwik Flo Pty Ltd (ACN 131 073 204); Twelfth Defendant: Michael Raad Architect Pty Ltd (ACN 082 247 845); Thirteenth Defendant: Universal Fire Systems Pty Ltd (ACN 119 766 246); Fourteenth Defendant: Blue Dragon Interior Pty Ltd (ACN 156 259 219); Fifteenth Defendant: Electrical Energy Group Pty Ltd (ACN 135 894 530)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Equity Technology and Construction List / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out Paragraphs of Pleading
Outcome
Paragraphs of the pleading struck out; leave to apply to re-plead; costs awarded to certain defendants.
Legal Topics
Pleadings, Striking Out, Particulars, Statutory Warranties, Negligence, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Negligent Misstatement, Unconscionable Conduct, Contractual Relations, Conspiracy
Civil Procedure Equity Building and Construction Pleadings Striking Out Particulars Statutory Warranties Negligence +5 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 7 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Owners-Strata Plan 91349

Plaintiff

Hallmark Construction Pty Ltd (ACN 066 609 729)

First Defendant

Raymond Michael Raad

Second Defendant

Anthony Bruce Crane

Third Defendant

Raad Holdings Pty Ltd (ACN 079 065 124)

Fourth Defendant

PNT Group Pty Ltd (ACN 165 795 602) ATF PNT Family Trust (ABN 50 650 103 404) t/as New Style Aluminium

Fifth Defendant

George Khalil & Associates Pty Ltd (ACN 098 851 211) ATF George Khalil Family Trust (ABN 44 936 164 688) t/as ACSES Engineers

Sixth Defendant

Duro Building Construction Pty Ltd (ACN 092 138 835)

Seventh Defendant

FB Masonry Pty Ltd (ACN 113 140 195)

Eighth Defendant

Mance Arraj Engineering Pty Ltd (ACN 153 123 865) ATF Mance Arraj Engineering Unit Trust (ABN 58 244 208 422) t/as HKMA Engineers

Ninth Defendant

Certified Building Specialists Pty Ltd (ACN 151 732 928)

Tenth Defendant

Kwik Flo Pty Ltd (ACN 131 073 204)

Eleventh Defendant

Michael Raad Architect Pty Ltd (ACN 082 247 845)

Twelfth Defendant

Universal Fire Systems Pty Ltd (ACN 119 766 246)

Thirteenth Defendant

Blue Dragon Interior Pty Ltd (ACN 156 259 219)

Fourteenth Defendant

Electrical Energy Group Pty Ltd (ACN 135 894 530)

Fifteenth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure Equity Technology and Construction List / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out Paragraphs of Pleading

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the form and content of the plaintiff's pleadings were sufficiently particularised or embarrassing
  2. 2 Whether the pleaded causes of action disclosed reasonable cause of action (including statutory warranty, negligence, misleading or deceptive conduct, negligent misstatement, unconscionability, interference with contractual relations, and conspiracy)
  3. 3 Whether identified paragraphs should be struck out and whether leave to re-plead should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The pleaded causes of action were expressed in conclusory terms, lacked necessary factual particulars, failed to distinctly plead factual foundations for duties, breaches and causation, and were embarrassing. The relevant paragraphs should be struck out but the plaintiff should have leave to apply to re-plead by notice of motion.

Court Disposition

Paragraphs of the pleading struck out; leave to apply to re-plead; costs awarded to certain defendants.

Orders

  • The specified paragraphs of the amended technology and construction list statement filed on 15 March 2019 be struck out as identified in the reasons.
  • The plaintiff be given leave to file a notice of motion returnable on 28 June 2019 seeking to file a further amended list statement, such motion and any supporting affidavit to be served no later than 14 June 2019.