PP v DD

The matter between PP and DD was before the Federal Court. The dispute involved the defendant's attempt to serve evidentiary statements on the plaintiff on the eve of the trial, which the plaintiff objected to. Additionally, the plaintiff made an application to strike out certain paragraphs of the defendant's defence on the basis of an abuse of process, alleging that the defendant was denying events that had already been the subject of a criminal conviction.

The court had to determine whether the defendant should be granted leave to serve the evidentiary statements late and whether the paragraphs of the defence that denied the criminal conviction should be struck out. The court considered the principles of case management and the need for finality in litigation. It also examined the plaintiff's application to strike out specific parts of the defence, focusing on whether the defendant's actions constituted an abuse of process.

The court concluded that granting leave for the late service of the evidentiary statements would be inappropriate and would undermine the principles of finality and fairness in litigation. The court found that the defendant's attempt to introduce new evidence at such a late stage was unreasonable and prejudicial to the plaintiff. Regarding the application to strike out, the court determined that striking out the paragraphs of the defence was not warranted, as it would not constitute an abuse of process, and the defendant had a right to raise all available defences. The court held that the criminal conviction alone did not preclude the defendant from denying the events in question.

No further orders were made beyond the refusal of leave to serve the evidentiary statements and the dismissal of the application to strike out.