Colman v Gordon M. Jenkins & Associates Pty Ltd [1987] FCA 821

JUDGMENT No. «Beaded LZ32.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )

GENERAL DIVISION No. G 384 of 1986

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY )

Between: BRIAN JAMES COLEMAN

Applicant

And: GORDON M. JENKINS AND ASSOCIATES PTY. LIMITED

Respondent

CORAM: Einfeld J.

DATE: 27 August 1987 —— FEDERAL COURT

OF AUSTRALIA 2u JAN 2003

LIBRARY *,

PLACE: Sydney

EX-TEMPORE JUDGMENT

The applicant came to the Federal Court for the purpose of commencing a case identified by the statement of claim as an alleged breach of section 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (the Act) by the respondent, and in the exercise of the accrued jurisdiction of the court, in negligence and breach of contract. The applicant also alleges breaches

of section 53 of the Act.

At the commencement of the hearing, the applicant sought leave to file an amended statement of claim, which I was informed was first made available to the respondent yesterday afternoon. It is clear from a consideration of the amended statement of claim that it substantially

broadens the legal and conceptual basis of the claim, and it appears

also to broaden its factual matrix by altering in some significant ways, the basis of certain of the exercises of the court's accrued jurisdiction. In meeting the application for leave to proceed upon the amended statement of claim, the respondent, whilst formally objecting, acknowledges that it is likely that the court would permit the applicant to conduct his full claim, rather than force him to proceed on_ the truncated basis supplied by the original statement of claim and

application.

In these circumstances, the respondent says that it should be granted an adjournment, with its costs thrown away by the nature of the amendments, by reason of the fact that the amended statement of claim will require it to do considerably more preparation and investigation, including at least the requirement of additional particulars and discovery, and