Johnston v ANZ Banking Group

Johnston sought to strike out an action brought by ANZ Banking Group. The dispute arose from an earlier proceeding where Johnston had been sued by ANZ for failing to repay a loan. That proceeding was settled, but ANZ now sought to recover the costs of the litigation from Johnston. ANZ's claim was founded on an allegation that Johnston maliciously prosecuted the earlier proceeding. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The legal issues before the court were whether the pleadings in the current proceeding were sufficient to support an action for malicious prosecution, and whether the proceeding should be struck out due to abuse of process or other deficiencies.

The court found that the pleadings in the current proceeding were deficient and failed to adequately allege facts that would support an action for malicious prosecution. The pleadings did not identify the cause of action, the time, place, and circumstances of the alleged malicious prosecution, or any other essential facts. The court also found that there were other deficiencies in the pleadings, including a failure to comply with procedural rules and a lack of particularity. The court concluded that the deficiencies in the pleadings were so significant that they amounted to an abuse of process. Accordingly, the court granted Johnston's application to strike out the proceeding. The court also ordered that ANZ pay Johnston's costs of the strike out application.

The court's decision in this case highlights the importance of ensuring that pleadings are sufficient to support a cause of action and comply with procedural requirements. In this case, the deficiencies in the pleadings were so significant that they resulted in the proceeding being struck out and the plaintiff being ordered to pay the defendant's costs. This decision serves as a reminder to practitioners to carefully review pleadings to ensure that they are adequate and compliant before filing them with the court.