Stojanovski v Stojanovski (No 2)

In the case of Stojanovski v Stojanovski (No 2), the court was asked to consider the procedural issues of amendment of pleadings and the application of res judicata in the context of family law proceedings. The primary dispute involved a challenge to the allowance of a further amendment to reinstate a claim that had previously been withdrawn by consent order. The matter was heard in the Family Court of Australia.

The legal issues before the court included whether the amendment to reinstate the claim was permissible and whether the consent order that resulted in the withdrawal of the claim constituted a final determination of the cause of action, thereby invoking the principle of res judicata. The court had to determine whether the circumstances permitted the amendment and whether the previous consent order could preclude the reintroduction of the claim.

The court found that the amendment to reinstate the claim was allowable as it did not constitute a substantive change to the cause of action but rather sought to correct a mistake. The court held that the consent order, which had not resulted in a final determination of the cause of action, did not preclude the amendment under the circumstances. Consequently, the court determined that the principle of res judicata did not apply, and the amendment was permitted.

The court's decision allowed the amendment to reinstate the claim, affirming that procedural errors could be corrected where necessary and that the consent order did not establish a final determination barring the reintroduction of the claim.