Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Tamaya Resources Limited (in liq) v Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (A Firm), in the matter of Tamaya Resources Limited (in liq) [2015] FCA 1098 Citation: Tamaya Resources Limited (in liq) v Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (A Firm), in the matter of Tamaya Resources Limited (in liq) [2015] FCA 1098
Parties: TAMAYA RESOURCES LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 071 349 249 v DELOITTE TOUCHE TOHMATSU (A FIRM), TIMOTHY BIGGS, CARL HARRIS and JOHN LEOTTA TAMAYA RESOURCES LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 071 349 249 and PHILIP CAMPBELL-WILSON AS LIQUIDATOR OF TAMAYA RESOURCES LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 071 349 249 v HUGH CALLAGHAN, RICHARD PALMER, MICHAEL FISHER, JAMES SQUIRE, GLENN KONDO, JOHN WALTER HICK, CHRISTOPHER HARTLEY and ANDREW DAVIDSON
File Numbers: NSD 327 of 2014 NSD 328 of 2014
Judge: GLEESON J
Date of judgment: 14 October 2015
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for leave amend pleadings – whether plaintiffs have had sufficient opportunity to plead case – whether prejudice to defendants not compensable by costs order – whether proposed amendments would be liable to be struck out – whether new legal foundation for claim arises out of facts already pleaded – public confidence in the judicial system – where proceedings are complex – where proposed amendments are substantial and would increase the scope and complexity of proceedings – where proposed amendments may extend the length of the hearing – where first two trial dates vacated – where plaintiffs have had ample opportunity to identify issues now sought to be raised – where issue arose in expert auditor's report – where claim under s 1041E of the Corporations Act 2001(Cth) not previously considered before identified by counsel – where explanation for delay deficient – obligation to prosecute proceedings diligently – where importance of amendments to plaintiffs' case not sufficiently articulated – leave to amend refused except to the extent that amendments unopposed – Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), ss 37M, 37N – Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), rr 8.21, 16.53
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate