Saridas v Papuan Oil Search Ltd (No 3) [2022] NSWSC 1515

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Saridas v Papuan Oil Search Ltd (No 3) [2022] NSWSC 1515 Hearing dates: 27 October 2022 Date of orders: 7 November 2022 Decision date: 07 November 2022 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Schmidt AJ Decision: 1. Ms Saridas be given leave to proceed on the third further amended statement of claim. 2. Ms Saridas bear the costs of the motions dealt with in Saridas and Saridas (No 2), in respect of those issues on which Oil Search succeeded. 3. Oil Search bear the costs of the motions dealt with in Saridas and Saridas (No 2), in respect of those issues on which Ms Saridas succeeded. Catchwords: COSTS — Party/Party — Costs orders in interlocutory proceedings — general rule that costs follow the event — Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 42.1 — cost of motions on which defendant succeeded to be borne by plaintiff — costs of aspects of motions on which plaintiff succeeded to be borne by defendant CIVIL PROCEDURE — Commencement of proceedings — Statement of claim — where plaintiff seeks leave to file third amended statement of claim — where defendant objects to some proposed amended pleadings — whether opposed pleadings are frivolous and vexatious — whether opposed pleadings do not disclose any reasonable cause of action — whether opposed pleadings are not available under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 1317AD — whether opposed pleadings have a tendency to cause prejudice, embarrassment or delay under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 13.4, 14.28 — where proper construction of legislative scheme disputed — Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), Pt 9.4AAA — Protection for whistleblowers — leave granted Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss 19, 56, 64, 98 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), Pts 14, 15, rr 13.4, 14.7, 14.9, 14.14, 14.19, 14.28, 15.1, 15.5 Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), Pt 9.4AAA, ss 1317AA, 1317AAA, 1317AAB, 1317AAC, 1317AAE, 1317AC, 1317AD, 1317ADA, 1317AADA, 1317AE, 1317AH Treasury Laws Amendment (Enhancing Whistleblower Protections) Bill 2018 Cases Cited: Banque Commerciale SA (in liq) v Akhil Holdings Limited (1990) 169 CLR 279; [1990] HCA 11 Cody v Nelson (1947) 74 CLR 629; [1947] HCA 17 Dare v Pulham (1982) 148 CLR 658; [1982] HCA 70 Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Pedavoli (2015) 91 NSWLR 485; [2015] NSWCA 237 Goldsmith v Sandilands [2002] HCA 31; (2002) 76 ALJR 1024 Kirby v Sanderson Motors Pty Ltd (2002) 54 NSWLR 135; [2002] NSWCA 44 Nowlan v Marson Transport Pty Ltd (2001) 53 NSWLR 116; [2001] NSWCA 346 Oshlak v Richmond River Council (1998) 193 CLR 72; [1998] HCA 11 Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton (2009) 238 CLR 460; [2009] HCA 16 Saridas v Papuan Oil Search Ltd [2022] NSWSC 825 Saridas v Papuan Oil Search Ltd (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 1032 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Aynet Saridas (Plaintiff) Papuan Oil Search Ltd (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr J Emmett SC (Plaintiff) Ms V Bulut (Plaintiff) Mr I Neil SC (Defendant) Mr B Rauf (Defendant)