Mason & Ors v Mills & Reeve (A Firm)

Mason & Ors v Mills & Reeve (A Firm)

Permission to re-amend the particulars of claim was granted because the claimants' new case was clearly set out, understandable, and not prejudicial to the defendants beyond what could be compensated by costs and a short adjournment. There was no prior adjudication barring the amendment, and the interests of justice required the claimants to have the opportunity to present their full case.

Parties
Claimants: Claire Swain Mason, David Jonathan Berry & Neil Gordon Kirby (Executors of CJ Swain Deceased), Claire Swain Mason, Abby Swain, Gemma Swain, Christa Swain; Defendants: Mills & Reeve (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil (professional Negligence) / Interlocutory Application for Permission to Re Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Permission to re-amend particulars of claim granted, subject to conditions and terms set out in the consequential order.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Solicitor's Duty of Care, Tax Advice Liability, Discretion in Amendments
Professional Negligence Civil Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Solicitor's Duty of Care Tax Advice Liability Discretion in Amendments

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claire Swain Mason, David Jonathan Berry & Neil Gordon Kirby (Executors of CJ Swain Deceased), Claire Swain Mason, Abby Swain, Gemma Swain, Christa Swain

Claimants

Mills & Reeve (A Firm)

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil (professional Negligence) / Interlocutory Application for Permission to Re Amend Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants should be granted permission to re-amend the particulars of claim to plead a new or differently formulated case against the defendants for professional negligence in tax advice.

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to re-amend the particulars of claim was granted because the claimants' new case was clearly set out, understandable, and not prejudicial to the defendants beyond what could be compensated by costs and a short adjournment. There was no prior adjudication barring the amendment, and the interests of justice required the claimants to have the opportunity to present their full case.

Court Disposition

Permission to re-amend particulars of claim granted, subject to conditions and terms set out in the consequential order.

Orders

  • Claimants to adduce evidence within 10 days to show the new contentions have a reasonable prospect of success.
  • Trial adjourned to 17th January 2011 with an expanded estimate of 10 days.