Media Trust SPA (As Trustee for the Jacaranda Trust) v BGB Weston Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1491 (KB) (16 October 2023)

Media Trust SPA (As Trustee for the Jacaranda Trust) v BGB Weston Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1491 (KB) (16 October 2023)

The court refused permission to amend the particulars of claim to introduce new causes of action because the proposed amendments constituted new claims that did not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the original claim, and the limitation periods for those claims had arguably expired. The court found it was reasonably arguable that the limitation defence applied and that section 32 Limitation Act 1980 did not clearly postpone the limitation period, as the claimant (or its predecessor) could with reasonable diligence have discovered the relevant facts. Accordingly, the amendments would confer an impermissible limitation advantage and were not permitted. The strike out...

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1491 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: In Media Trust SPA (as Trustee for the Jacaranda Trust); First Defendant: BGB Weston Limited; Second Defendant: Lorenzo Gallucci; Third Defendant: Gennaro Pinto
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil (high Court, King's Bench Division) / Interlocutory Applications: Strike Out/reverse Summary Judgment and Application to Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Application to amend particulars of claim refused; strike out application for abuse of process not granted; claim cannot proceed on amended basis.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Limitation of Actions, Fraud and Deceit, Conspiracy, Breach of Trust, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

In Media Trust SPA (as Trustee for the Jacaranda Trust)

Claimant

BGB Weston Limited

First Defendant

Lorenzo Gallucci

Second Defendant

Gennaro Pinto

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (high Court, King's Bench Division) / Interlocutory Applications: Strike Out/reverse Summary Judgment and Application to Amend Particulars of Claim

  1. 1 Whether the claimant should be permitted to amend the particulars of claim to introduce new causes of action after expiry of limitation periods
  2. 2 Whether the new claims arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the original claim for the purposes of section 35 Limitation Act 1980 and CPR 17.4
  3. 3 Whether the claims are statute-barred or benefit from postponement under section 32 Limitation Act 1980 (fraud/deliberate concealment)

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused permission to amend the particulars of claim to introduce new causes of action because the proposed amendments constituted new claims that did not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the original claim, and the limitation periods for those claims had arguably expired. The court found it was reasonably arguable that the limitation defence applied and that section 32 Limitation Act 1980 did not clearly postpone the limitation period, as the claimant (or its predecessor) could with reasonable diligence have discovered the relevant facts. Accordingly, the amendments would confer an impermissible limitation advantage and were not permitted. The strike out...

Court Disposition

Application to amend particulars of claim refused; strike out application for abuse of process not granted; claim cannot proceed on amended basis.

Orders

  • Permission to amend particulars of claim refused.
  • Claimant's application to amend dismissed.