McLouglin v Jones & Ors [2005] EWCA Civ 764 (27 May 2005)

McLouglin v Jones & Ors [2005] EWCA Civ 764 (27 May 2005)

Permission to amend schedule of loss to include claims for loss of capital appreciation on properties sold as a consequence of defendants' breach of duty is granted, but claims based on acquisition of additional properties are struck out due to prejudice and lack of fair opportunity for defendants to respond before imminent trial.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 764
Parties
Claimant/appellant: McLoughlin; Defendants/respondents: Jones and Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; permission to amend granted only for claims relating to properties sold, not for acquisition of additional properties.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Strike Out Applications, Damages Assessment, Limitation, Costs
Professional Negligence Civil Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Strike Out Applications Damages Assessment Limitation Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

McLoughlin

Claimant/appellant

Jones and Others

Defendants/respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant may amend schedule of loss to include new heads of damages shortly before trial
  2. 2 Whether claims for loss of capital appreciation and acquisition of additional properties should be permitted
  3. 3 Whether late amendment prejudices fair trial

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to amend schedule of loss to include claims for loss of capital appreciation on properties sold as a consequence of defendants' breach of duty is granted, but claims based on acquisition of additional properties are struck out due to prejudice and lack of fair opportunity for defendants to respond before imminent trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; permission to amend granted only for claims relating to properties sold, not for acquisition of additional properties.

Orders

  • Claimant's claim for loss of capital appreciation in relation to properties sold reinstated.
  • Claims based on acquisition of additional properties remain struck out.