Patrick v Capital Finance Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 206

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Patrick v Capital Finance Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 206 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – leave sought to amend Statement of Claim after close of evidence – amendments sought opposed by respondents – fresh issues raised - interests of justice – prejudice to respondents - not a function of pleadings to allow amendments which will enable case to be made out at close of evidence – argument that respondents would have conducted their case differently – whether prejudicial to allow amendments sought – whether leave should be granted to make further amendments to Statement of Claim Dare v Pulham (1982) 148 CLR 658 cited Queensland v J L Holdings Pty Limited (1997) 189 CLR 146 referred to The Commonwealth v Verwayen (1990) 170 CLR 394 referred to Burnham v The City of Mordialloc (1956) VLR 239 referred to Mercantile Mutual Insurance v Farrington (1996) 44 NSWLR 634 referred to Gordon v MacGregor (1909) 8 CLR 316 referred to R & C Products v S C Johnson (1993) 42 FCR 188 cited Koninklijke Philips v Remington (1999) 91 FCR 167 cited Red Bull Australia Pty Ltd v Sydneywide Distributors Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1228 cited Twentieth Century Fox v S A Brewery (1996) 66 FCR 451 cited Simplot Australia Pty Ltd v McCain Foods (Aust) Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 518 cited WILLIAM GEORGE DOUGHTY PATRICK (for himself and as representing the persons referred to in paragraph 1 of the Statement of Claim) v

CAPITAL FINANCE CORPORATION (AUSTRALASIA) PTY LIMITED

(ACN 074 692 443), CAPITAL FINANCE CORPORATION (AUSTRALASIA) PTY LIMITED (ACN 074 692 443), CAPITAL FINANCE CORPORATION (AUSTRALIA) PTY LIMITED (ACN 074 352 104), CAPITAL FINANCE CORPORATION PTY LIMITED, (ACN 064 512 385), KERROD GRANT PARK, OVERSEA-CHINESE BANKING CORPORATION LIMITED (ABN 073 598 035), CHRISTOPHER COOTE, PHILLIP EMANUEL PRODUCTIONS LIMITED (ACN 002 693 512)