It was possible to amend pleadings outside of the limitation period, where the alteration to identify the correct party was genuine and the mistake had not mislead any party. In this case there was no reasonable doubt about who had been intended to be sued. The overriding objective and rule 17.4(3) could either be applied to allow the amendment.
Citations:
Times 24-Aug-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 214
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Gregson v Channel Four Television Corporation CA 4-Jul-2002
Whether trial before jury appropriate . .
Cited by:
See Also – Gregson v Channel Four Television Corporation CA 4-Jul-2002
Whether trial before jury appropriate . .
Cited – Morgan Est (Scotland) Ltd v Hanson Concrete Products Ltd CA 17-Feb-2005
The defendant appealed an order adding two new claimants.
Held: Cases decided under the old RSC were not apposite for matters covered by the new Civil Procedure Rules. The court was not bound by the Sardinia Sulcis rules: ‘The Sardinia Sulcis . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice, Limitation
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147247
