S H Hallas P/L v National Executive Benefits

[1992] FCA 670

BETWEEN: S.H. HALLAS PTY. LTD. (In Liquidation)

First: Applicant

AND:	&LAN RICHARD TAYLOR and
PATRICK PHILLIP FINNIMORE

Second Applicants

AND :  NATIONAL EXECUTIVE BENEFITS LTD.

Respondent

MINUTES OF ORDERS

Drummond J	R q
Brisbane	l0 August, 1992 \.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        The costs of today are costs in the proceedings.

rely on in these proceedings.

The respondent file and serve all witness

THE COURT DIRECTS THAT:

1.	(a)	The applicants file and serve all witness statements upon which they intend to rely by 4.00 p.m. on Thursday, 13 August, 1992.
(b)	witness affidavits filed and served in
If the applicants propose to rely only on
bankruptcy proceedings QB 1433 of 1990, it will be sufficient compliance with direction l(a) herein for the applicants to file and serve a short note identifying which of the witness affidavits filed in the bankruptcy proceedings they propose to

(a) statements it intends to rely on by 4.00 p.m. on Wednesday, 19 August, 1992.

If the respondent proposes to rely only on The applicants file and serve witness affidavits in reply to those witness affidavits to be relied on by the respondent, by 4.00 p.m. on Wednesday, 26 August, 1992. (l'] witness affidavits filed and served in
bankruptcy proceedings QB 1433 of 1990, it
will be sufficient compliance with
direction 2(a) herein for the respondent
to file and serve a short note identifying
which of the witness affidavits filed in
the bankruptcy proceedings it proposes to
rely on in these proceedings.

This matter is to be heard together with action QG
3008 of 1992 and the two applications filed 26
March, 1992 in bankruptcy proceedings QB 1433 of

1990.

Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in

.m!@:  Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )	No. QG 46 of 1992
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY	1
GENERAL DIVISION	1

BETWEEN: S.H. HALLAS PTY. LTD. (In Liquidation)

First ~pplicant

AND :	ALAN RICHARD TAYLOR and
PATRICK PHILLIP FINNIMORE

Second Applicants

AND :  NATIONAL EXECUTIVE BENEFITS LTD.

Respondent

m:	Drummond J
Date:	10 August, 1992

Place: Brisbane

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

On 29 June last I gave a direction designed to bring to a head a dispute that then existed concerning claims by the respondent for particulars of certain aspects of the

applicants' statement of claim. I directed that by 1 August,

setting out any deficiencies complained of in the particulars	1992 the respondent was to deliver a letter to the applicants
provided of the statement of claim. That direction was not complied with until 3 August, a deficiency that takes on added significance when one has regard to the fact that there have been what are really unexplained long periods of repeated delay in complying with directions made in two associated applications filed in bankruptcy proceedings QB 1433 of 1990.

The need for these particulars is difficult to

accept given that it is conceded by counsel for the respondent that the issues in this action are basically the same as those in a related Supreme Court proceeding which was certified in

the Supreme Court by the respondent as being ready for trial
prior to it being transferred to this court, it now being

action QG 3008 of 1992.

I have invited counsel for the respondent to take me

to the best point he wants to make as to the alleged
deficiencies in the applicants' pleading in this action. He
submits that the allegations in paragraph 3 inadequately

particularise the case there sought to be made out and that

the respondent will not know the case it has to meet. I have

already referred to the fact that that did not seem to be a problem for the respondent in action QG 3008 of 1992, where much the same issues are raised.

However, having heard what counsel has to say, it

seems to me that what the respondent is really requiring is

something in the nature of a brief opening of the applicants'
evidence as opposed to further particulars of the statement of
claim. That is not the proper role of particulars and, in any
event, I do not consider that the respondent will be in any
way disadvantaged given that directions have been made in
relation to the two applications filed in bankruptcy
proceedings QB 1433 of 1990 requiring the filing of witness
affidavits.

I reject the request for a further extension of time

within which to pursue the question of particulars.

I certify that this and the preceding two pages is a true copy of the reasons for judgment herein of the Honourable Mr. Justice,Drummond.

Associate: h d ~ 4 v v

Date:  1/10 *ugustMi992