Klenk And Ors v The Betesh Partnership Solicitors & Anor [2016] EWCA Civ 1203 (16 November 2016)

The judge's decision to allow the amendment was within his discretion, the new claim arose out of substantially the same facts, and no real prospect of success exists for the appeal.

Citation: [2016] EWCA Civ 1203
Parties: Applicants: Klenk and Others; Respondents: The Betesh Partnership Solicitors and Another
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 16 November 2016
Procedural Posture: Appeal From Case Management Decision / Oral Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome: Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics: Amendment of Pleadings, Case Management Discretion, Collective Investment Schemes, Limitation Act, Financial Services and Markets Act

Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Amendment of Pleadings Case Management Discretion Collective Investment Schemes Limitation Act Financial Services and Markets Act

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Klenk and Others

Applicants

The Betesh Partnership Solicitors and Another

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Case Management Decision / Oral Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether the proposed amendment constituted a new claim
2 Whether the new claim arose out of the same or substantially the same facts as the original claim
3 Whether the judge erred in exercising discretion to allow a late amendment

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's decision to allow the amendment was within his discretion, the new claim arose out of substantially the same facts, and no real prospect of success exists for the appeal.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

Application refused