Keope v Salvatore Ceramics Australia Pty Ltd

[2011] QDC 86

[2011] QDC 86

DISTRICT COURT

CIVIL JURISDICTION

JUDGE ROBIN QC

No 3674 of 2009

CERAMICHE KEOPE	Plaintiff
and
SALVATORE CERAMICS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD	Defendant

BRISBANE

..DATE 17/05/2011

ORDER

CATCHWORDS
Non-appearance of plaintiff upon its application for further and better particulars of defence and counterclaim - application rendered moot by plaintiff's having independently got the counterclaim struck out - application dismissed.

HIS HONOUR:  The court makes an order that the plaintiff's application for further and better particulars of the defence and counterclaim filed 3rd of May 2011 be dismissed.

It's grateful to Mr Samuel, the defendant's solicitor for attending today.  The plaintiff company which Mr Samuel advises is an Italian one and its solicitors haven't extended the same courtesy to the court, there being no response from either when they were called this morning.

Their non-appearance is understandable given that the counterclaim has been disposed of by Judge McGill's striking it out last Friday, as the court was asked to do by the plaintiff's application filed 9th of May 2011 which was returnable last Friday.  That order rendered the application before the court today moot.

The grounds for striking out nominated in the application filed on the 9th of May 2011 were failure to comply with an order of Judge Griffin of the 8th of April 2011.

There is life in the proceeding yet; Judge McGill ordered that it be placed on the commercial list and be set down for trial before him in the week commencing 6th of June 2011.

The draft order, initialled by his Honour, indicates that the initiating documents were applications filed the 3rd of May and 9th of May 2011; however, the earlier of those applications for which a hearing had all along been indicated for today, has remained on the list.  That's something that the plaintiff, as the applicant, probably ought to have attended to but did not.

Mr Samuel has attended to inform the court of what's happened and perhaps in his client's interests to ensure that no relief was sought against his client today.

‑‑‑‑‑