Westfield Management Limited & Ors v Direct Factory Outlets Homebush Pty Limited & Ors [2004] NSWLEC 327

Westfield Management Limited & Ors v Direct Factory Outlets Homebush Pty Limited & Ors [2004] NSWLEC 327

The Further Amended Points of Claim are insufficiently particularised and do not adequately set out the legal basis and facts supporting the alleged breach of condition 11 of development consent. The case, as pleaded, does not link the relevant provisions or clarify the applicants' arguments, especially regarding 'primary function' or 'shop'. Consequently, paragraphs relating to the First, Second, and Fourth Respondents are struck out, but leave to replead is granted. Relief affecting all tenants requires joinder of those tenants, and the pleadings must clearly indicate the legal theory of breach.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Proceedings / Strike Out/summary Dismissal Application Determination Before Hearing on Merits
Outcome
Strike out of paragraphs in Further Amended Points of Claim with leave to replead. Summary dismissal refused.
Legal Topics
['summary Dismissal' 'strike Out Applications' 'pleading Requirements' 'joinder of Parties' 'development Consent Conditions']
['environmental Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['summary Dismissal' 'strike Out Applications' 'pleading Requirements' 'joinder of Parties' 'development Consent Conditions']

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

Class 4 Proceedings / Strike Out/summary Dismissal Application Determination Before Hearing on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Applicants' pleadings disclose a reasonable cause of action" 'Whether proceedings should be struck out or summarily dismissed' 'Whether necessary or appropriate parties have been joined' 'Proper construction and application of condition 11 of development consent']

Ratio Decidendi

The Further Amended Points of Claim are insufficiently particularised and do not adequately set out the legal basis and facts supporting the alleged breach of condition 11 of development consent. The case, as pleaded, does not link the relevant provisions or clarify the applicants' arguments, especially regarding 'primary function' or 'shop'. Consequently, paragraphs relating to the First, Second, and Fourth Respondents are struck out, but leave to replead is granted. Relief affecting all tenants requires joinder of those tenants, and the pleadings must clearly indicate the legal theory of breach.

Court Disposition

Strike out of paragraphs in Further Amended Points of Claim with leave to replead. Summary dismissal refused.

Orders

  • ['Paragraphs 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 55, 56 and 57 of the Further Amended Points of Claim relating to First, Second and Fourth Respondents are struck out.' 'Further Amended Application struck out in relation to these Respondents.' 'Leave to file further amended pleadings is granted.'...