- Amendments when limitation is an issue—the court’s approach (D R Jones Yeovil Ltd v Drayton Beaumont Services Ltd)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: The court considered an application to re-amend particulars of claim in circumstances where the defendant contended that the amendments ought to be refused as they were time barred. The decision is of interest because it considers two different approaches that a court, faced with an amendment that brings limitation issues into play, can take when deciding whether or not to permit the amendment sought. The first, which the court termed the ‘Conventional Approach’, requires the court to consider whether the amendments arise out of the same, or substantially the same, facts as those already in issue. The second, less conventional approach, was termed the ‘Mastercard’ basis; requiring the court to consider whether the claimant would, in any event, be able issue a fresh claim so that the amendment ought to be permitted on case management grounds in any event. If proceeding on the latter basis, a permitted amendment would not benefit from the principle of relation back. Written by Christopher Snell, barrister at New Square Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial