Ruth Higgins SC, Stewart Webster KC, Bianca Kabel and Bianca Fernandez appeared for the respondent, instructed by Clayton Utz.
In this case, the plaintiffs applied to strike out various paragraphs of the sixth further amended defence and counterclaim in the context of the estoppel and misleading and deceptive conduct pleas. The application was made in reliance on r 171 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) and the inherent jurisdiction of the Court.
The Court observed that the power to strike-out a pleading on the basis that it fails to disclose a reasonable cause of action, “must be exercised with caution and should only be exercised in the plain and obvious case”. The Court declined to strike out the pleaded Representations and the APLNG Assumptions in the context of the estoppel and misleading or deceptive conduct claims. As to Tri-Star’s complaints regarding the allegations of detrimental reliance, the Court held that paragraphs 235, 243(a) and 244, 249 to 254I and 256 to 259 should be struck out with leave to replead.
The judgment can be read by clicking here
