Norman v Wall (No 7) [2021] NSWSC 222

Norman v Wall (No 7) [2021] NSWSC 222

Leave to amend was refused and proceedings dismissed because plaintiffs were given multiple opportunities, including pro bono assistance, to properly plead their case but repeatedly failed to do so; on balance, timely and fair disposal of proceedings requires a line to be drawn, and further amendment would cause prejudice and delay, with the pleadings remaining fatally flawed and non-compliant.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Orders Following Multiple Applications to Amend Pleadings and for Dismissal
Outcome
Proceedings dismissed for want of due despatch and abuse of process. Leave to rely on further amended statements of claim refused. Costs awarded to defendant.
Legal Topics
['pleadings' 'self Represented Litigants' 'case Management' 'abuse of Process' 'want of Due Despatch']
['civil Procedure'] ['pleadings' 'self Represented Litigants' 'case Management' 'abuse of Process' 'want of Due Despatch']

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

Civil / Final Orders Following Multiple Applications to Amend Pleadings and for Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to file the further amended statement of claim' 'Whether proceedings should be dismissed for want of due despatch or abuse of process' 'Appropriate costs orders']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to amend was refused and proceedings dismissed because plaintiffs were given multiple opportunities, including pro bono assistance, to properly plead their case but repeatedly failed to do so; on balance, timely and fair disposal of proceedings requires a line to be drawn, and further amendment would cause prejudice and delay, with the pleadings remaining fatally flawed and non-compliant.

Court Disposition

Proceedings dismissed for want of due despatch and abuse of process. Leave to rely on further amended statements of claim refused. Costs awarded to defendant.

Orders

  • ['Refuse leave to the plaintiff to rely upon further iteration of the Statement of Claim provided on 8 March 2021.' 'Refuse leave to the plaintiffs to file and rely upon the proposed Further Amended Statement of Claim dated 17 December 2020.' 'Pursuant to UCPR 12.7 and 13.4, dismiss the proceedings.' "Plaintiffs to...