On 3 April 2007, Justice Bongiorno delivered his judgment (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2007/91.html)
following Gunns' application to proceed with their case based on the fourth version of the statement of claim. This follows versions 1, 2 and 3 being thrown out by the court.

On 20 October 2006 Justice Bongiorno delivered his judgment on costs following Version 3 of Gunns' statement of claim being thrown out.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2006/386.html

Justice Bernard Bongiorno has rejected Gunns’ third statement of claim in its entirety. The company has been given until 19 October to tell the court if it will try to introduce another statement of claim.

In the Victorian Supreme Court, Justice Bongiorno said that the statement of claim 'cannot be allowed to stand in its present form’. Its size and complexity places an unreasonable burden and enormous cost on individual defendants.

Defendants cautiously welcomed the decision, but pointed out the unfairness of the process. Nearly two years on, after huge expense and anxiety, the case is no further advanced and Gunns still has the option to make a fourth statement of claim.

You can now download a scan of the decision below. Also you can view the full reasons for the decision at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2006/329.html

Decision of Judge Bongiorno following application to strike out Gunns first and second statements of claim.

Mention
• Costs awarded to defendants for 17 June 2005 directions hearing, strike out application and thrown away.
• Timetable set for requesting and supplying particulars