Ricochet Pty Ltd v Equity Trustees Executors and Agency Co Ltd

The matter before the Federal Court of Australia involved an application by the respondents to strike out a further amended statement of claim filed by the applicant, Minero Pty Limited. The proceedings were initiated by Minero against the first respondent, Nabbie Ajam, alleging that Ajam, as a former director, had breached his duties under both the general law and statute, including receiving payments to which he was not entitled, making false representations, and failing to provide information about the financial records. The applicant sought an account and inquiry into the first respondent's conduct. The application was heard by Whitlam J, who had to determine whether the further amended statement of claim was maintainable and whether the applicant was entitled to the relief sought.

The legal issues before the court included whether the further amended statement of claim contained the essential allegations to entitle Minero to a general account against Ajam, and whether the relief sought in the application was appropriate given the nature of the claims. Whitlam J held that the further amended statement of claim did not contain the necessary allegations to confer an entitlement to a general account, as it failed to identify any facts that would make Ajam an "accounting party." The court also noted that the applicant seemed to misconceive the role of the remedy of account, as the relief sought appeared to be an order for payment of a specified sum rather than a general account. The court concluded that the application to strike out the further amended statement of claim must succeed as the pleadings were indefensible and would not lead to a useful outcome.

Whitlam J granted the respondents' application to strike out the further amended statement of claim and ordered Minero to pay the first respondent's costs of the application. The court suggested that the parties discuss how to proceed with identifying the real issues in the case to avoid further futile exercises with pleadings. The matter was stood over for directions to be given on 18 March 1993, at which point the parties were expected to further amend the application and prepare a fresh statement of issues for the trial.