Armit v Jeminex Limited (No 2) [2012] FCA 656

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Armit v Jeminex Limited (No 2) [2012] FCA 656 Citation: Armit v Jeminex Limited (No 2) [2012] FCA 656

Parties: MADONNA ANNE ARMIT v JEMINEX LIMITED ACN 113 973 087

File number: NSD 1744 of 2010

Judge: ROBERTSON J

Date of judgment: 27 June 2012

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – amendment of pleadings – whether leave should be granted to permit substantial amendment to originating application where matter already set down for hearing – costs thrown away by the amendment – whether costs should be taxed immediately PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – subpoenas – application by respondent to set aside or amend subpoenas issued by applicant – whether subpoenas relevant

Legislation: Federal Court Rules 1979 O 62 r 3 Federal Court Rules 2011 r 40.13

Cases cited: Bailey v Beagle Management Pty Ltd (2001) 182 ALR 264

Date of hearing: 20 June 2012

Place: Sydney

Division: GENERAL DIVISION

Category: Catchwords

Number of paragraphs: 17

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr JS Mendel

Solicitor for the Applicant: Diamond Conway Lawyers

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr F Corsaro SC

Solicitor for the Respondent: Sachs Gerace Lawyers

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION NSD 1744 of 2010

BETWEEN: MADONNA ANNE ARMIT

Applicant

AND: JEMINEX LIMITED ACN 113 973 087

Respondent

JUDGE: ROBERTSON J DATE OF ORDER: 27 JUNE 2012 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The applicant have leave to amend her pleading in the form of the draft annexed as KN12 to the affidavit of Mr Krishneel Nath sworn 1 June 2012, such pleading to be filed and served by 22 June 2012. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs thrown away by the amendment. 3. The respondent's interlocutory application filed on 6 June 2012 be refused. The orders made on 4 April 2012 be varied as follows. 4. The respondent request any further and better particulars of the applicant's amended originating pleading by 5 July 2012. 5. The applicant respond to the respondent's request for further and better particulars by 13 July 2012. 6. The respondent file and serve its defence to the applicant's amended originating pleading by 6 August 2012. 7. On or before 13 August 2012 the applicant give notice to the respondent and the respondent give notice to the applicant of any further documents she or it requires by way of discovery. 8. The parties complete any further discovery by 24 August 2012. 9. The applicant file and serve all lay and expert evidence upon which she proposes to rely by 28 August 2012. 10. The respondent file and serve all lay and expert evidence upon which it proposes to rely by 12 October 2012. 11. The applicant file and serve all lay and expert evidence upon which she proposes to rely in reply by 2 November 2012. 12. The matter be listed for directions at 9:30am on 7 November 2012 for the purpose of making detailed pre-trial directions. 13. The parties participate in a mediation by 13 November 2012, such mediation to be arranged by the applicant. 14. If any party is in default of any order set out above, the non-defaulting party is to notify his Honour's Associate within 24 hours of the default occurring and the Court will list the matter for directions shortly thereafter. 15. Liberty to apply on 48 hours' notice. 16. Subject to order 2, the costs of the interlocutory applications heard on 20 June 2012 be reserved. Note: Any lay evidence which goes beyond annexing or exhibiting documents is not to be given by way of affidavit but is to be served on the other party, but not filed, as a proof of evidence of each witness sufficient to put the other side on notice of the substance of that evidence. At the trial that lay evidence is to be adduced orally. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.