- You are here:
- Home
Elegals Litigator's Toolkit (Jackson and Pastellas) is the most comprehensive and up-to-date guide to the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld). It includes the complete Uniform Civil Procedure Rules, extensive commentary and analysis incorporating new cases weekly, and access to Practice Directions, and forms.
Elegals Litigator’s Toolkit (Jackson and Pastellas) makes finding the right rule (and knowing what to do with it when you get there) simple. An Overview & Key Features, and a Beginner's Guide is provided for each chapter. An expert commentary is provided for each rule within each chapter.
We have also included the easiest way to access forms prescribed by the Rules, practice directions, costs and fees, relevant legislation and relevant caselaw; wherever possible, they are linked. In practical terms, this means that users can access all of that material at the click of a button, without leaving their desktop.
Our unique "Search Toolkit" function finds the information you want and takes you to the source at the click of a button.
The principal contributors to the Elegals Litigator’s Toolkit (Jackson and Pastellas) are Sheryl Jackson (former Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, QUT), and Julie Pastellas (senior lecturer, Faculty of Law, QUT). Numerous additional contributions have been made by specialist academics and private practitioners.
Subscribers are alerted to the following significant case updates
Rule 389 - continuation of proceeding after delay - a step in the "proceeding" - no application to enforcement proceedings
Commissioer of State Revenue v Amos [2025] QSC 76 (11.4.25)
Rule 378 - amendment before request for trial date - supervised case list
McEwan v Commissioner of Taxation [2025] QCA 48 (11.4.25)
Rule 149 - statements in pleadings - material facts - examples - foreign law; surprise - other examples
Australia Pacific LNG Pty Ltd v Santos Toga Pty Ltd [2025] QSC 49 (27.3.25)
Rule 159 - particulars - interest - particulars required
Australia Pacific LNG Pty Ltd v Santos Toga Pty Ltd [2025] QSC 49 (27.3.25)
rule 681 - general rule about costs - departure from general rule - illustrations - judicial review applications
Drage v Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service [2025] QSC 57 (26.3.25)
Rule 283 - judgment for liquidated claim under guarantee and not contractual right of indemnity
HT Contracting Pty Ltd v Palta [2025] QSC 55 (25.3.25)
Rule 290 - judgment set aside - not irregularly obtained - delay explained - Prima facie defence on merits
HT Contracting Pty Ltd v Palta [2025] QSC 55 (25.3.25)
Rule 149 - statements in pleadings - material facts, not evidence; material facts - examples - causation
Brisbane Airport Corporation Pty Ltd v Airservices Australia [2025] QSC 54 (24.3.25)
Rule 687 - assessed costs to be paid unless court orders otherwise - exercise of discretion to fix costs
Yafe v Sivyer [2025] QSC 53 (24.3.25)
Rule 188 - withdrawal of admission - discretionary considerations - supporting documents/evidence
Fang v Yao [2025] QSC 46 (21.3.25)
Rule 687 - exercise of discretion to fix costs; quantifying costs - general principles
Partram Developments Pty Ltd v The Registrar of Cooperative Housing Societies [2025] QSC 47 (21.3.25)
Rule 748 - extension of time to appeal refused - no merit in proposed appeal
Taiepa v State of Queensland [2025] QCA 36 (21.3.25)
Rule 5 - philosophy - overriding obligations of parties and court - application of rule - other examples - aid to construction of other rules
Corrigan v Hill [2025] QSC 34 (5.3.25)
Rule 135 - no step without notice of intention to defend - relevance to application to strike out proceedings?
Corrigan v Hill [2025] QSC 34 (5.3.25)
Rule 687 - assessed costs to be paid unless court orders otherwise - cap on amount of costs to be recovered - judicial review proceedings
Smith v Chief Executive, Queensland Corrective Services No 2 [2025] QSC 38 (5.3.25)
Rule 642 - application to revoke grant refused
Lewis v Watson [2025] QSC 35 (28.2.25)
Rule 135 - no step without notice of intention to defend - leave granted to bring application to strike out claim based on cause of action not recognised in Australia
Jennings v Jennings [2025] QDC 13 (26.2.25)
Rule 171 - striking out pleadings - no reasonable cause of action - examples - tort of unlawful interference with business not recognised in Australia
Jennings v Jennings [2025] QDC 13 (26.2.25)
Other recent updates
New to this site?
To review further content of this service, please email or call Elegals (see "Contact Elegals" tab above) to request a free content-limited trial account.
System Requirements
For best results when using Elegals Litigator's Toolkit (Jackson and Pastellas), we recommend using a current version of Microsoft Edge, Firefox or Google Chrome. Both windows and apple Mac operating systems are supported.
If you are a new Elegals Litigator's Toolkit (Jackson & Pastellas) user, click on the "User Guide" button for an explanation of how to use the service for maximum benefit.
If you have any questions or feedback, please contact the webmaster at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Feedback
Our authors value your feedback. In the interests of assisting them and other users of this publication, please pass on any comments you have about any aspects of the service or any information or views which might enhance its value to you and your colleagues. Please email your suggestions to: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.