Superline Enterprises Pty Ltd v Palassis Architects

The case of Superline Enterprises Pty Ltd v Palassis Architects involved a dispute between Superline, the plaintiff, and Palassis Architects, along with BCA, the defendants, regarding a building contract. The plaintiff sought to prevent the defendants from striking out certain parts of the plaintiff's statement of claim on the grounds that they did not disclose a reasonable cause of action and could potentially prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of the action. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The court had to decide whether the pleadings made against the defendants disclosed a reasonable cause of action and whether they had the potential to prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of the action. In addition, the court had to determine whether evidence could be admitted in the determination of a strike out application brought under O 20 r 19(1)(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), and whether it was appropriate to strike out on grounds of a yet unpleaded limitation defence.

The court held that evidence was not admissible in the determination of an application under O 20 r 19(1)(a), save for documents pleaded in the statement of claim. However, in opposing Palassis Architects' application, the plaintiff sought to read into evidence an affidavit sworn by its director, Mr Panagioths Nikos Eustratios Manios, on 18 April 2019. The court admitted this evidence on the basis that it contained material that was relevant to the disposition of the application pursuant to O 20 r 19(1)(c). The court also held that it was not appropriate to strike out on grounds of a yet unpleaded limitation defence, as it was unable to assess when the time ran for some progress payment claims, and the dates upon which loss and damage occurred had not been pleaded. As a result, the pleadings made against BCA were struck out pursuant to O 20 r 19(1)(a). The affidavit sworn by Mr Manios on 16 April 2019 was inadmissible and not admitted into evidence.

The court ordered that the pleadings made against Palassis Architects were not to be struck out, but the pleadings made against BCA were to be struck out.