Ciprijanovic v Schindler Lifts Australia Pty Ltd

The case of Ciprijanovic v Schindler Lifts Australia Pty Ltd involved a plaintiff who alleged that he was injured due to a defective lift operated by the defendant, Schindler Lifts Australia Pty Ltd. The plaintiff sought damages for his injuries. The dispute was heard by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. The plaintiff filed a motion to strike out certain parts of the defendant's defence, arguing that they did not constitute proper pleadings. Specifically, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant's non-admission and denial in its defence were not sufficient.

The court had to determine whether the defendant's non-admission and denial in its defence amounted to proper pleadings. The key issue was whether the defendant's response was sufficient to respond to the plaintiff's claims and whether the plaintiff's motion to strike out certain parts of the defence was justified. The court considered the principles of pleadings under the Federal Court Rules and the relevant case law. The court found that a non-admission and denial in a defence could constitute proper pleading if it provided the plaintiff with sufficient information to respond to the defendant's defence.

The court held that the defendant's non-admission and denial in its defence were proper pleadings. The court found that the defendant's response was sufficient to respond to the plaintiff's claims and that there was no issue of general principle that would warrant striking out parts of the defence. The court rejected the plaintiff's motion to strike out certain parts of the defence. The court held that the defendant's non-admission and denial in its defence were proper pleadings, and the plaintiff's motion to strike out parts of the defence was not justified. The court did not make any orders.