Starwhist Pty Ltd v Tonge (No. 2)

Starwhist Pty Ltd sought to amend its pleadings in a proceeding that had already been determined. The respondents, Tonge, opposed the amendment, arguing that it introduced a new claim and was not permitted by the previous judgment granting leave to amend. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with deciding whether the proposed pleadings complied with the earlier judgment.

The primary issue before the court was whether the proposed pleadings complied with the judgment granting leave to file them, particularly in light of the new claim that was being sought to be introduced. The court had to consider whether the new claim was permissible under the terms of the previous judgment and whether there was a reasonable explanation for the delay in raising the claim.

The court held that the proposed pleadings did not comply with the judgment granting leave to amend. The new claim introduced was not permitted as it was not within the scope of the previous judgment. Additionally, there was no reasonable explanation provided for the delay in raising the new claim. The court emphasised the importance of adhering to the terms of the judgment granting leave to amend and that any significant departures from those terms would not be allowed.

As a result, the court disallowed the proposed pleadings, thereby preventing the introduction of the new claim. The amendment was denied, and the new claim was not permitted to proceed.