Rogerson v City of Greater Dandenong

In Rogerson v City of Greater Dandenong, the plaintiff sought to bring a claim under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2012 (Vic) against the defendant, the City of Greater Dandenong. The plaintiff alleged that they had made a disclosure of information concerning corrupt or improper conduct within the council, and that they had subsequently suffered detrimental action as a result of that disclosure. The City of Greater Dandenong applied to strike out the plaintiff's statement of claim on the basis that it was confusing, unclear, and inadequately pleaded.

The central legal issues in this case were whether the plaintiff's statement of claim failed to disclose a cause of action, whether it may prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of the proceeding, or whether it was otherwise an abuse of the process of the Court. Additionally, the court needed to consider the necessary elements of a claim under s 47 of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2012 (Vic) and whether they had been adequately pleaded by the plaintiff.

The court found that the plaintiff's statement of claim was indeed confusing and unclear, and that some elements of the cause of action were inadequately pleaded. Specifically, the court found that the plaintiff had not adequately pleaded a causal nexus between their knowledge and belief of the making of the public interest disclosure and the subsequent detrimental action. The court held that this was necessary in order to properly plead a claim under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2012 (Vic), as the allegations were akin to allegations of fraud, dishonesty and misfeasance in public office. The court therefore granted the City of Greater Dandenong's application to strike out the plaintiff's statement of claim.

The court's final orders were that the plaintiff's statement of claim be struck out in its entirety, and that the defendant be at liberty to amend their defence within 21 days of the order. The court also noted that the plaintiff had the option to file an amended statement of claim within 28 days of the order, provided that it addressed the deficiencies identified by the court.