National Australia Bank Ltd v C H Protheroe Pty Ltd

The case of National Australia Bank Ltd v C H Protheroe Pty Ltd involved a dispute between the plaintiff, National Australia Bank Ltd, and the defendant, C H Protheroe Pty Ltd, over a cross-claim that the defendant sought to add during ongoing possession proceedings. The proceedings took place in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The defendant had initially filed a cross-claim for relief under the Contracts Review Act, but later sought leave to amend the defence and cross-claim to include breaches of the Code of Banking Practice and unconscionability. The plaintiff opposed the application, citing significant delays, multiple changes of solicitors, and a failure to comply with court orders.

The legal issues before the court were whether the defendant could be granted leave to amend its defence and cross-claim so late in the proceedings, and whether the plaintiff could be expected to meet the new claims given the significant delays. The court had to consider the defendant's failure to serve evidence to support the new claims and the need for expert evidence of banking practice. The defendant's history of delays and changes in representation without adequate explanation further complicated the matter. The court was also mindful of the upcoming hearing date, which was three months away.

The court held that the defendant's application to amend its defence and cross-claim was not in the interests of justice. The delay in filing the application, coupled with the defendant's failure to serve evidence in support of the new claims, meant that the plaintiff would not have sufficient time to prepare a response. The court noted the need for expert evidence of banking practice and the defendant's history of delays and changes in solicitors without proper explanation. Consequently, the court refused the defendant leave to rely on the breaches of the Code of Banking Practice and unconscionability.