interlocutory application for leave to withdraw admissions in defence pursuant to r 26.11(2)(b) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)
application for leave to amend defence to substitute pleas that the respondent does not know and therefore cannot admit particular facts
factors relevant to the exercise of discretion under r 26.11(2)(b) considered
Quick Take
1Where admissions in a defence were made after due consideration, on the basis of legal advice and instructions, were specifically personalised to the party's situation, and were certified as having a proper basis, the court will not grant leave to withdraw them absent a sufficient explanation demonstrating good reason to disturb what was conceded.
2An assertion that a director's knowledge should not be attributed to a corporate party does not, without more, provide a sufficient basis for withdrawing admissions already deliberately made by that corporate party in its pleading, particularly where the affidavit in support fails to address the instructions received or the investigations undertaken before the admissions were certified.
3The principles in Aizdan Pty Ltd v L & A Laird (NSW) Pty Ltd concerning attribution of a director's knowledge to a company for the purpose of defeating the company's claims do not bear on the distinct question of whether it is in the interests of justice to grant leave to withdraw pleaded admissions under r 26.11(2)(b).
