Landini v State of NSW

The matter of Landini v State of New South Wales concerned a dispute regarding malicious prosecution. The plaintiff sought to amend their pleadings to allege that the state had engaged in malicious prosecution, including the fabrication of evidence and the giving of false evidence at both committal and trial. The application was made in the context of a broader case where the plaintiff had been prosecuted and convicted of various criminal offences, which he now sought to challenge on the basis of alleged misconduct by the state.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to amend their pleadings to include the new allegations and, if so, under what conditions. The court needed to determine if the allegations of fabrication of evidence and false testimony were sufficiently serious to warrant an amendment and whether the plaintiff had a reasonable prospect of success on the amended claim. Additionally, the court considered the relevance of the allegations of unlawful agreement to the elements of reasonable and proper cause and malice in the context of vicarious liability of the Crown.

The court concluded that the plaintiff should be granted conditional leave to amend their pleadings. The judge found that the allegations of fabrication of evidence and the giving of false evidence were of a sufficiently serious nature to warrant an amendment. The court reasoned that these allegations went to the heart of the plaintiff’s malicious prosecution claim and, if proven, would establish the necessary elements of the cause of action. The judge further held that the plaintiff had demonstrated a reasonable prospect of success on the amended claim, particularly in relation to the vicarious liability of the Crown and the impact of the alleged unlawful agreement on the elements of reasonable and proper cause and malice.

The court ordered that the plaintiff be granted conditional leave to amend their pleadings to include the allegations of fabrication of evidence and the giving of false evidence at committal and trial, as well as the allegations of an unlawful agreement. The amendment was to be subject to the plaintiff providing further particulars and meeting any other conditions the court might impose.