Trampolines R Great P/L v Jalco Group Pty Ltd; Wincrow Pty Ltd v Jalco Group Pty Ltd

The proceedings were brought by Trampolines R Great P/L and Wincrow Pty Ltd against Jalco Group Pty Ltd. The plaintiffs sought damages for negligence and nuisance caused by the alleged failure of the defendant to properly maintain and inspect their property, resulting in damage to the plaintiffs' property. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The defendant sought to have the plaintiffs' statements of claim struck out on the basis that they were confusing and embarrassing, and failed to adequately plead the cases pursued, including for pure economic loss.

The court was required to determine whether the plaintiffs' statements of claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action for negligence and nuisance, and whether they complied with the requirements of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules. The court also had to consider whether the plaintiffs' claims for pure economic loss were valid, and whether the statements of claim were sufficiently particularised to put the defendant on notice of the nature of the claims being made. The defendant argued that the statements of claim were vague, ambiguous, and did not provide sufficient detail to enable the defendant to properly respond to the claims.

In dismissing the defendant's application to strike out the statements of claim, the court held that the plaintiffs' claims were reasonably capable of being made out on the basis of the allegations made in the statements of claim. The court found that the plaintiffs had adequately pleaded the causes of action for negligence and nuisance, and that the statements of claim were not confusing or embarrassing. The court also held that the plaintiffs' claims for pure economic loss were valid, and that the statements of claim were sufficiently particularised to enable the defendant to properly respond to the claims. The court noted that the plaintiffs were entitled to amend their statements of claim if necessary to further particularise the claims.

The defendant's application to strike out the plaintiffs' statements of claim was dismissed. The court ordered the defendant to file an appearance and defence to the plaintiffs' claims within 28 days of the judgment. The court also ordered the parties to attend a case management conference to discuss the progress of the proceedings and any other matters that needed to be addressed.