Bowerbank v Amos [2003] EWCA Civ 1161 (31 July 2003)

Bowerbank v Amos [2003] EWCA Civ 1161 (31 July 2003)

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge was within his discretion to allow the late amendment to pleadings, but erred in refusing an adjournment to allow the defendant to cross-examine the claimant on the amended case. The assessment of damages was also flawed as it did not apply the correct contractual measure. The appeal was allowed to the extent of setting aside the relevant parts of the order and remitting the case for further hearing.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Civ 1161
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Nigel Bowerbank; Respondent/claimant: Rachelle Amos (formerly Staff)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; case remitted for further hearing; costs order set aside for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Breach of Trust, Amendment of Pleadings, Adjournment, Measure of Damages, Costs
Contract Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Breach of Contract Breach of Trust Amendment of Pleadings Adjournment Measure of Damages +1 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nigel Bowerbank

Appellant/defendant

Rachelle Amos (formerly Staff)

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in granting permission to amend the particulars of claim after judgment was delivered but before the order was perfected
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in refusing the defendant's application to adjourn for further cross-examination and evidence after the amendment
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in assessing damages based on the value of assets at a fixed date rather than the proper contractual measure

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge was within his discretion to allow the late amendment to pleadings, but erred in refusing an adjournment to allow the defendant to cross-examine the claimant on the amended case. The assessment of damages was also flawed as it did not apply the correct contractual measure. The appeal was allowed to the extent of setting aside the relevant parts of the order and remitting the case for further hearing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; case remitted for further hearing; costs order set aside for reconsideration.

Orders

  • Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the order of 6 December 2002 set aside
  • Case remitted to His Honour Judge Green QC to resume hearing on the amended particulars of claim dated 4 December 2002