Mark Lewis Law Ltd & Anor v Taylor Hampton Solicitors Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 2359 (QB) (22 September 2017)

Mark Lewis Law Ltd & Anor v Taylor Hampton Solicitors Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 2359 (QB) (22 September 2017)

The appeal was refused because the proposed amendments to the defence and counterclaim constituted a collateral challenge to an earlier unappealed order (Gidden 1), and the Master had properly exercised his discretion in refusing permission to amend. The prejudice to the respondent and lateness of the application further justified refusal. Limited permission to appeal was granted only on two minor points (grounds 7 and 8) relating to the period of the counterclaim and incorporation of certain concessions.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2359 (QB)
Parties
First Claimant/respondent: Mark Lewis Law Ltd; Second Claimant/respondent: Mark Lewis; First Defendant/appellant: Taylor Hampton Solicitors Ltd; Second Defendant/appellant: Taylor Hampton Law LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (application for Permission to Appeal) / Permission to Appeal Against Case Management Order (amendment of Pleadings)
Outcome
Limited permission to appeal granted on grounds 7 and 8; otherwise, permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Collateral Challenge, Case Management Discretion, Withdrawal of Admissions, Mitigation of Loss
Civil Procedure Contract Law Amendment of Pleadings Collateral Challenge Case Management Discretion Withdrawal of Admissions Mitigation of Loss

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Lewis Law Ltd

First Claimant/respondent

Mark Lewis

Second Claimant/respondent

Taylor Hampton Solicitors Ltd

First Defendant/appellant

Taylor Hampton Law LLP

Second Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (application for Permission to Appeal) / Permission to Appeal Against Case Management Order (amendment of Pleadings)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal should be granted against refusal to amend defence and counterclaim
  2. 2 Whether proposed amendments constituted a collateral challenge to an earlier order
  3. 3 Whether the court should permit withdrawal of a factual concession in pleadings

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was refused because the proposed amendments to the defence and counterclaim constituted a collateral challenge to an earlier unappealed order (Gidden 1), and the Master had properly exercised his discretion in refusing permission to amend. The prejudice to the respondent and lateness of the application further justified refusal. Limited permission to appeal was granted only on two minor points (grounds 7 and 8) relating to the period of the counterclaim and incorporation of certain concessions.

Court Disposition

Limited permission to appeal granted on grounds 7 and 8; otherwise, permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Taylor Hampton permitted to present its counterclaim up to 29 April 2015, with corresponding concessions extended.
  • Taylor Hampton permitted to incorporate other concessions already made in Mark Lewis' favour, such as the 20% discount in recovery of fees billed.