Security Industry Authority v Josoemag Services Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 1381 (KB) (06 June 2025)

Security Industry Authority v Josoemag Services Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 1381 (KB) (06 June 2025)

Where there is no risk of relation back prejudice in a claim under the Human Rights Act 1998, CPR 17.4 does not apply and amendments to add new claims may be permitted under CPR 17.1(2)(b), even if the new claims do not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts. The Master was correct to grant permission to amend the claim form, as the SIA was not prejudiced in its limitation defence and the amendments crystallised the real dispute early in the litigation.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 1381 (KB)
Parties
Appellant (defendant): Security Industry Authority; Respondent (claimant): Josoemag Services Limited; Respondent (claimant): Emmanuel Olanrewaju Joshua; Respondent (claimant): Korede Abiodun Joshua
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Order Granting Permission to Amend Claim Form
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Limitation Periods, Human Rights Act 1998, European Convention on Human Rights, Relation Back Doctrine
Civil Procedure Human Rights Amendment of Pleadings Limitation Periods Human Rights Act 1998 European Convention on Human Rights Relation Back Doctrine

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

Parties

Security Industry Authority

Appellant (defendant)

Josoemag Services Limited

Respondent (claimant)

Emmanuel Olanrewaju Joshua

Respondent (claimant)

Korede Abiodun Joshua

Respondent (claimant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Order Granting Permission to Amend Claim Form

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted to amend the claim form to add new claims under articles 6, 8, and 14 ECHR after expiry of the limitation period under section 7(5) HRA
  2. 2 Whether CPR 17.4 applies to amendments in HRA claims where relation back prejudice is absent
  3. 3 Whether new claims arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the original claim

Ratio Decidendi

Where there is no risk of relation back prejudice in a claim under the Human Rights Act 1998, CPR 17.4 does not apply and amendments to add new claims may be permitted under CPR 17.1(2)(b), even if the new claims do not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts. The Master was correct to grant permission to amend the claim form, as the SIA was not prejudiced in its limitation defence and the amendments crystallised the real dispute early in the litigation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to amend claim form granted as sought in applications dated 4 December 2023 and 17 May 2024
  • SIA to file defence by 31 July 2024