Grochowski v Kearney

The applicant, Grochowski, sought leave to appeal an interlocutory decision by the primary judge, which involved the refusal to strike out allegations in the statement of claim or to order further particulars. The dispute was before the Federal Court of Australia. The primary judge declined to order the applicant to provide further particulars or to strike out certain allegations in the statement of claim, providing multiple independent reasons for the decision. The court was required to determine whether the error in one of the reasons affected the other reasons and whether the primary judge erred in finding that allegations not pleaded to were taken to be admitted.

The court examined the primary judge's reasoning and concluded that the passage of reasoning was not infected by the earlier incorrect reasoning about deemed admissions. The court found that the primary judge's reasons at [48]-[56] were an independent basis for the ruling. The court applied the well-known principle that a tight rein must be kept upon interference with the orders of Judges of first instance on a point of practice or procedure to ensure the proper administration of justice. The court considered the amended statement of claim, the relevant request for particulars, and the transcript of counsel’s submissions on the point made to the primary judge. The court concluded that the primary judge's decision not to order further particulars or to strike out any part of the pleading was correct, as the pleaded particulars of knowledge were detailed and the respondent would have the benefit of the applicant’s affidavit evidence and a written opening by the time of trial.

The court dismissed the application for leave to appeal and found that it was not a case where it could be said that the making or continuing of the application was unreasonable, so it would not make an order for costs. The final order was that the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.