Fregnan v Stanizzo

The appeal concerned a dispute between Ms Fregnan (the plaintiff) and Mr Stanizzo (the defendant) regarding the adequacy of particulars provided in a statement of claim. The matter came before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales, with Beazley P, Macfarlan and Leeming JJA presiding.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the particulars provided by Ms Fregnan in her statement of claim were sufficient in accordance with rule 15.1 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), or whether the requests for further particulars made by Mr Stanizzo were, in substance, an attempt to elicit answers to interrogatories. The District Court had previously dismissed Ms Fregnan's proceedings and ordered her to pay Mr Stanizzo's costs on an indemnity basis, finding the particulars to be inadequate.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that rule 15.1 does not require particulars of a high degree of specificity, nor does it mandate the provision of detailed background or contextual information for every allegation. The Court found that the District Court had erred in its assessment of the particulars, particularly in its characterisation of Mr Stanizzo's requests as legitimate requests for particulars rather than disguised interrogatories. The Court applied the principle that particulars are intended to inform the other party of the case they have to meet, not to provide a detailed roadmap of the evidence.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the District Court's orders dismissing the proceedings and ordering indemnity costs, and dismissed Mr Stanizzo's Notice of Motion. Ms Fregnan was awarded costs of the motion and the proceedings in the Court of Appeal.