The Director of the Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate v Linkhill Pty Ltd (No.3)

The matter before the Court was an application by the respondent to withdraw certain admissions and to file and serve a further amended defence and other affidavit material. The respondent sought leave to withdraw admissions made in its further amended defence and to file further affidavit material and a further amended defence. The respondent submitted that the amendments sought were necessary to properly address the ownership of the property at 384-386 Flinders Lane and the nature of the work performed there by the workers. The applicant opposed the application on the basis that the proposed amendments would necessitate the withdrawal of admissions previously made and there was no proper basis for their withdrawal. The applicant submitted that the proposed amendments would be futile as they did not disclose any arguable defence to its claims. The Court considered the principles applicable to an application to withdraw admissions and the application of those principles to the facts of the case. The Court found that the respondent had not provided sufficient explanation for the making of the admissions or demonstrated that the explanation provided was based on evidence of a solid and substantial character. The Court found that the applicant would be prejudiced by the granting of the respondent’s application in a case, in particular as to costs and delay to the proceedings. In the circumstances, the Court refused the application in a case.