Bioconstruct GMBH v Winspear Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2390 (QB) (11 September 2020)

Bioconstruct GMBH v Winspear Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2390 (QB) (11 September 2020)

Permission to amend the Particulars of Claim post-trial to plead a new cause of action in deceit was refused. The application was made too late, without sufficient justification, and would undermine the finality of litigation. The proposed amendment did not disclose a viable claim in deceit with the required clarity and particularity. The prejudice to the defendant and the interests of other court users outweighed any injustice to the claimant. The proper course, if the claimant wished to pursue the deceit claim, was to commence fresh proceedings.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2390 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Bioconstruct GmbH; First Defendant: Steven Winspear; Second Defendant: Stevenson Renewables Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil (queen's Bench Division) / Post Trial Application to Amend Pleadings After Judgment, Costs Determination
Outcome
Application to amend refused; claim against SRL dismissed; costs reserved or determined as per subsequent orders.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Deceit (fraudulent Misrepresentation), Finality of Litigation, Costs Orders, Civil Procedure Rules (cpr), Estoppel, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Contract Law Fraud Amendment of Pleadings Deceit (fraudulent Misrepresentation) Finality of Litigation Costs Orders Civil Procedure Rules (cpr) +2 more

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bioconstruct GmbH

Claimant

Steven Winspear

First Defendant

Stevenson Renewables Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (queen's Bench Division) / Post Trial Application to Amend Pleadings After Judgment, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant permission to amend the Particulars of Claim post-trial to plead a new cause of action in deceit against the First Defendant
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendment discloses a viable claim in deceit
  3. 3 Whether the application to amend is unduly late and prejudicial

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to amend the Particulars of Claim post-trial to plead a new cause of action in deceit was refused. The application was made too late, without sufficient justification, and would undermine the finality of litigation. The proposed amendment did not disclose a viable claim in deceit with the required clarity and particularity. The prejudice to the defendant and the interests of other court users outweighed any injustice to the claimant. The proper course, if the claimant wished to pursue the deceit claim, was to commence fresh proceedings.

Court Disposition

Application to amend refused; claim against SRL dismissed; costs reserved or determined as per subsequent orders.

Orders

  • Bioconstruct's claim against Stevenson Renewables Limited dismissed.
  • Permission to amend Particulars of Claim against Steven Winspear refused.