Fernandez v Glev Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2000] FCA 1859
•20 DECEMBER 2000
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Fernandez v Glev Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1859
[2000] FCA 1859
20 DECEMBER 2000
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Federal Court of Australia, Fernandez and others sought leave to amend their proceedings to substitute Glev Franchises Pty Ltd as the first respondent. The applicants also sought to strike out certain paragraphs from their Statement of Claim, with leave to replead, and to file an Amended Statement of Claim by a specified date. The court was asked to consider the future conduct of the proceedings, including matters of expedition and the place of trial.
The court considered whether the applicants were entitled to amend their proceedings by substituting the first respondent, and whether the specified paragraphs of the Statement of Claim should be struck out. The court also considered whether the applicants should be granted leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim by the specified date, and the appropriate procedure for the respondents to follow if they wished to contend that the Amended Statement of Claim, or particular paragraphs in it, should be struck out.
The court found that the applicants were entitled to amend the proceedings by substituting the first respondent. The court considered it appropriate to grant leave for the applicants to file an Amended Statement of Claim by the specified date. The court outlined the procedure to be followed by the respondents if they wished to contend that the Amended Statement of Claim, or particular paragraphs in it, should be struck out. The court listed the matter for further directions to consider the future conduct of the proceedings.
The court granted leave to the applicants to amend the proceedings by substituting Glev Franchises Pty Ltd as the first respondent. Paragraphs 18-24, 25, 26 and 27 of the Statement of Claim were struck out, with leave to replead. The applicants were granted leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim by 5 February 2001. If the respondents wished to contend that the Amended Statement of Claim, or particular paragraphs in it, should be struck out, they were to serve an outline of their submissions on the applicants and lodge it with the associate prior to 16 February 2001. The matter was listed for further directions on 20 February 2001, at which time consideration would be given to the future conduct of the proceedings, including matters of expedition and the place of trial.
The court considered whether the applicants were entitled to amend their proceedings by substituting the first respondent, and whether the specified paragraphs of the Statement of Claim should be struck out. The court also considered whether the applicants should be granted leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim by the specified date, and the appropriate procedure for the respondents to follow if they wished to contend that the Amended Statement of Claim, or particular paragraphs in it, should be struck out.
The court found that the applicants were entitled to amend the proceedings by substituting the first respondent. The court considered it appropriate to grant leave for the applicants to file an Amended Statement of Claim by the specified date. The court outlined the procedure to be followed by the respondents if they wished to contend that the Amended Statement of Claim, or particular paragraphs in it, should be struck out. The court listed the matter for further directions to consider the future conduct of the proceedings.
The court granted leave to the applicants to amend the proceedings by substituting Glev Franchises Pty Ltd as the first respondent. Paragraphs 18-24, 25, 26 and 27 of the Statement of Claim were struck out, with leave to replead. The applicants were granted leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim by 5 February 2001. If the respondents wished to contend that the Amended Statement of Claim, or particular paragraphs in it, should be struck out, they were to serve an outline of their submissions on the applicants and lodge it with the associate prior to 16 February 2001. The matter was listed for further directions on 20 February 2001, at which time consideration would be given to the future conduct of the proceedings, including matters of expedition and the place of trial.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Summary Judgment
-
Discovery & Disclosure
-
Res Judicata
-
Interlocutory Orders
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Fernandez v Glev Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1859
Most Recent Citation
DPP v Gebregiorgis [2023] VSCA 166
Cases Citing This Decision
138
Maroney v the Queen B101/2002
[2003] HCATrans 822
Maroney v the Queen B101/2002
[2003] HCATrans 822
Maroney v The Queen
[2003] HCATrans 772
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
0
Dare v Pulham
[1982] HCA 70
Mac Audio & Acoustical Consultants Pty Ltd (in liq) v Eddy
[1999] SASC 443