The Court of Appeal held that leave granted by a judge to file a further amended statement of claim, without express limitation on the form of amendment, should not be construed as impliedly limited to requiring the plaintiff to plead only the specific factual link identified in the judge's reasons for striking out the original pleading. The Court confirmed that a subsequent strike out application directed at the re-pleaded paragraph was a fresh application to be determined on its own merits under r 23.02, not a continuation of the earlier application, and the Associate Justice was correct to assess whether the new pleading disclosed an arguable cause of action. The Court left open whether Director of War Service Homes v Harris is distinguishable on the basis that the Territory had no proprietary interest in the houses or land at the time the cause of action arose, noting that question is for trial.
The full text is available to signed-in members.