1Where a counterclaim seeks unliquidated damages that may exceed the Magistrates Court's jurisdictional limit, transfer to the Supreme Court is appropriate even where the primary claim falls within the lower court's jurisdiction, and the costs regime under rr 1723 and 1725 of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT) lessens the warrant for close scrutiny of the evidence underpinning the asserted quantum.
2Where a plaintiff is compelled over opposition to litigate in the Supreme Court due to a defendant's counterclaim and ultimately recovers damages within the Magistrates Court's jurisdiction, the plaintiff is well placed to seek an alternative costs order under r 1725(3) so as not to be penalised for the transfer.
3Leave to amend pleadings may be granted even at a late stage under r 502 of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT) where the amendments arise from the same factual substratum and are likely to clarify the issues in dispute, but the party seeking the indulgence bears the costs thrown away.
