Abstract
‘Justice’ in civil litigation has traditionally meant justice as between the parties. However, pressure on public resources and delay resulting from traditional civil procedures has precipitated reform that now requires judges to case manage proceedings. ‘Justice’ has been broadened by such reform to include taking into account cost, delay and prejudice to other users of the civil litigation system as a central consideration when determining whether to grant leave to amend. The High Court in Queensland v J L Holdings Pty Ltd appeared to maintain the traditional narrow concept of ‘justice’. Recently, however, the High Court appears to have, in part, resiled from that view when considering court rules concerning amendment.
This article examines the High Court's interpretation of the court rules for amendment at issue in Aon Risk Services, the impact of that reasoning on the scope of J L Holdings and case management.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
