Watson v Kriticos (Summary Judgment)

In the case of Watson v Kriticos, the plaintiff, a patent attorney, sought to enforce an alleged agreement with the defendant, his client, concerning the disposition of patents and patent applications related to the Surf Machine Invention. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant had agreed to provide him with a 12.5% ownership interest in the patents. The defendant, in turn, applied for summary judgment and to strike out parts of the plaintiff's statement of claim. The court had to determine whether the plaintiff had reasonable prospects of successfully prosecuting his case and whether certain parts of the plaintiff's pleadings should be struck out for failing to disclose a reasonable cause of action.

The court considered the principles governing summary judgment and the striking out of pleadings. The defendant argued that the plaintiff could not demonstrate that the defendant had agreed to give him a 12.5% share in the patents. Given that the plaintiff's evidence was based on a telephone conversation and the defendant did not contradict this evidence, the court found it problematic for the plaintiff to succeed in his claim. Furthermore, the court found that the plaintiff's pleadings failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action concerning the loss and damage that would have occurred if the defendant had not breached the alleged agreement and fiduciary duty. The court held that the plaintiff needed to re-plead these aspects.

The court dismissed the defendant's application for summary judgment but granted the application to strike out certain paragraphs of the plaintiff's statement of claim. The court allowed the plaintiff to re-plead these parts within 28 days. The court also granted the plaintiff leave to serve the relevant documents on the second defendant in Canada, in accordance with the Hague Service Convention. The court ordered that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the interlocutory application.