Pedler & Anor v The Water Board

The parties before the High Court of Australia were Roger Kevin Pedler and Stella Hildagard Pedler (deceased) as respondents/plaintiffs, and The Water Board as the first applicant/defendant, with the Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales as the second applicant/defendant. The Water Board and the Attorney-General sought to strike out the proceedings brought against them by the Pedlers.

The legal issues before the court were whether the proceedings lacked a reasonable cause of action and whether the statement of claim was unsustainable, warranting dismissal or a stay of proceedings. The applicants relied on various rules of court, including Order 63 rule 2, which allows for the stay of proceedings where there is no reasonable or probable cause, and Order 20 rule 29, which permits the striking out of pleadings.

The applicants argued that despite having filed a defence, the court could still summarily dispose of the matter. They contended that the filing of a defence was a procedural requirement and did not preclude an application to strike out the proceedings, particularly as it clarified the basis of their defence and assisted the court in identifying the issues. The applicants also referred to an affidavit in support of their application, which detailed the background of previous proceedings initiated by Mr. Pedler against the Water Board.