Vrsecky v Reaper and Anor (No.4)

In *Vrsecky v Reaper and Anor (No.4)*, the applicant, Vrsecky, sought to strike out the defence of the respondents, Reaper and Anor, in proceedings before the Supreme Court of Queensland. The dispute concerned allegations of misleading and deceptive conduct, and the respondents had filed a defence that the applicant argued was embarrassing and an abuse of process.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the respondents' defence, which relied on a broad assertion of reliance on independent legal advice and the applicant's own conduct, was sufficiently particularised to withstand an application to strike it out. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the defence adequately pleaded the factual basis for the claims of independent legal advice and the applicant's alleged contribution to their own loss.

Judge Burchardt reasoned that a defence of reliance on independent legal advice must plead with sufficient particularity the advice received, from whom it was received, and how it was acted upon. Similarly, a defence alleging contributory fault requires specific averments as to the applicant's conduct and how that conduct caused or contributed to the loss. The Court found that the respondents' defence lacked the necessary specificity in these regards, rendering it embarrassing and potentially an abuse of process as it did not clearly articulate the case the applicant was required to meet.

Consequently, the Court ordered that the respondents' defence be struck out. The respondents were granted leave to file an amended defence within a specified timeframe, provided it complied with the rules of pleading.