| Source: | All England Reporter |
| Publisher Citation: | [2007] All ER (D) 365 (Jul) |
| Neutral Citation: | [2007] EWHC 1773 (TCC) |
| Court: | Queen's Bench Division (Technology and Construction Court) |
| Judge: | Jackson J |
| Representation | Andrew Spink QC and Robert-Jan Temmink (instructed by Yates Barnes, Chorley) for the claimant. |
| Jonathan Acton-Davis QC (instructed by Eversheds LLP) for the Secretary of State. | |
| Judgment Dates: | 16 July 2007 |
Catchwords
Statement of claim - Amendment - Right to amend - Amendment late in course of litigation - Rule requiring parties to plead entire case in one set of proceedings - Whether rule applicable - Whether amendments conflicting with overriding objective - Civil Procedure Rules 1998, SI 1998/3132, CPR Pt 1.
The Case
Statement of claim Amendment. The rule that parties would not normally be permitted to re-open earlier litigation in respect of a matter that might have been pleaded in that litigation, could not be invoked to prevent a party from pleading at a late stage in litigation issues that might have been pleaded earlier. In all the circumstances, the amendments that the claimant sought to make to its particulars of claim did not conflict with the overriding objective in CPRPt1, and, accordingly, would be allowed.
Practice Areas
Lexis®Library
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
