Watson v State of Western Australia [No 2]

Case [2013] FCA 529


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Watson v State of Western Australia [No 2] [2013] FCA 529 

Citation: Watson v State of Western Australia [No 2] [2013] FCA 529
Parties: JOHN WATSON & ORS v STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA & ORS
File number: WAD 6099 of 1998
Judge: GILMOUR J
Date of judgment: 15 March 2013
Date of hearing: 15 March 2013
Place: Perth
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: No catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 3
Counsel for the Applicant: Ms J Cole with Mr S Blackshield
Solicitor for the Applicant: Kimberley Land Council
Counsel for Oil Basins: Ms M Watts
Solicitor for Oil Basins: Hunt & Humphry
Counsel for certain pastoralists: Dr H Esbenshade (with leave)
Counsel for the Commonwealth: Ms A Ladhams
Solicitor for the Commonwealth: Australian Government Solicitor
Counsel for the State of Western Australia: Ms C Taggart
Solicitor for the State of Western Australia: State Solicitor’s Office

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

WAD 6099 of 1998

BETWEEN:

JOHN WATSON & ORS
Applicant

AND:

STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA & ORS
Respondent

JUDGE:

GILMOUR J

DATE OF ORDER:

15 MARCH 2013

WHERE MADE:

PERTH

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The applicant be granted leave to amend the main application in the form of the exhibit "EX JC 1” to the affidavit of Jacki Lynn Cole sworn 14 March 2013.

2.The engrossed copy of exhibit "EX JC 1” to the affidavit of Jacki Lynn Cole sworn 14 March 2013 which is accompanied by affidavits executed by each member of the applicant stands as the amended application.

3..           The applicant shall provide a copy of the amended application to any respondent on request.

4.There be no orders as to costs.

Note:Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

WAD 6099 of 1998

BETWEEN:

JOHN WATSON & ORS
Applicant

AND:

STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA & ORS
Respondent

JUDGE:

GILMOUR J

DATE:

15 MARCH 2013

PLACE:

PERTH

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. I made orders in this matter on 15 March 2013, and gave ex tempore reasons at that time for doing so.  These are my reasons, edited but not such as to alter the substance of those reasons.

  2. This is an interlocutory application by the applicant seeking to leave to file an amended application in the form of the document which is annexure A to the affidavit of Jacki Lynn Cole sworn 14 March 2013.  The applicant also relies upon an earlier affidavit of Ms Cole sworn on 19 February 2013 and an affidavit of Alexander David Chalmers who is an employee with the Kimberley Land Council as a Native Title Officer and Legal Officer, affirmed by him on 18 February 2013.  The affidavit of Ms Cole of 14 March 2013 replaces an earlier affidavit which had been filed by the applicant, affirmed by Mr Simon Charles Blackshield on 15 January 2013.  The differences between the amended application which is annexure A to Mr Blackshield’s affidavit and that which is annexure A to the affidavit of Ms Cole of 14 March 2013 are really quite minor.  I am satisfied that the meetings which gave rise to the resolution that this application be made were properly convened and due process was followed.  In those circumstances, I am satisfied that it is appropriate on the evidence before me to make orders in terms of the interlocutory application subject to amendment. 

  3. The orders, then, will be made in terms of a minute of proposed orders filed by the solicitors for the applicant dated 15 March 2013.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Gilmour.

Associate:

Dated:       29 May 2013

Details
AGLC
Watson v State of Western Australia [No 2] [2013] FCA 529
Case
[2013] FCA 529
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Watson v State of Western Australia [No 2], the Federal Court was tasked with addressing an application for leave to amend the applicant's main application. The applicant sought to amend the application by incorporating a specific exhibit from an affidavit sworn by Jacki Lynn Cole on 14 March 2013. The State of Western Australia was the respondent to the application.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the applicant should be granted permission to amend the main application in the manner proposed, specifically by incorporating the exhibit in question. The court had to consider the rules and principles governing amendments to pleadings, including the balance between the need for procedural fairness and the preservation of the integrity of the judicial process.

The court granted the application for leave to amend, noting that the proposed amendment was not an attempt to introduce new causes of action but rather to incorporate a document that was already before the court. The court considered that the amendment would not prejudice the respondent and that it was in the interests of justice to allow the amendment. The court also noted that the amendment did not involve significant changes to the application and that there was no undue delay in seeking the amendment. Consequently, the court ruled that the applicant be granted leave to amend the main application in the specified manner, with the engrossed copy of the exhibit standing as the amended application. The court further directed that the applicant provide a copy of the amended application to any respondent on request. No orders were made as to costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The applicant be granted leave to amend the main application in the form of the exhibit "EX JC 1” to the affidavit of Jacki Lynn Cole sworn 14 March 2013.

2. The engrossed copy of exhibit "EX JC 1” to the affidavit of Jacki Lynn Cole sworn 14 March 2013 which is accompanied by affidavits executed by each member of the applicant stands as the amended application.

3.. The applicant shall provide a copy of the amended application to any respondent on request.

4. There be no orders as to costs.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.