Sprint Electric Ltd v Buyer's Dream Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 638 (Ch) (17 March 2020)

Sprint Electric Ltd v Buyer's Dream Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 638 (Ch) (17 March 2020)

Application to amend Points of Defence is refused because the amendments are late, would expand the trial beyond its allotted time, require adjournment, and do not satisfy the exceptional circumstances test under PD 57AB paragraph 2.50.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 638 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Sprint Electric Limited; First Defendant: Buyer's Dream Limited; Second Defendant: Dr Aristides George Potamianos
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Inquiry as to Damages Following Breach of Director's Duties and Breach of Contract / Application to Amend Points of Defence
Outcome
Application to amend Points of Defence dismissed except for uncontentious tidying up amendments.
Legal Topics
Breach of Director's Duties, Breach of Contract, Limitation of Liability Clauses, Case Management, Shorter Trial Scheme
Contract Law Company Law Civil Procedure Breach of Director's Duties Breach of Contract Limitation of Liability Clauses Case Management Shorter Trial Scheme

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Sprint Electric Limited

Claimant

Buyer's Dream Limited

First Defendant

Dr Aristides George Potamianos

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Inquiry as to Damages Following Breach of Director's Duties and Breach of Contract / Application to Amend Points of Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants should be permitted to amend Points of Defence to plead limitation of liability under 2015 contract
  2. 2 Whether limitation clause applies to work done before 2015 contract
  3. 3 Whether limitation clause applies retrospectively

Ratio Decidendi

Application to amend Points of Defence is refused because the amendments are late, would expand the trial beyond its allotted time, require adjournment, and do not satisfy the exceptional circumstances test under PD 57AB paragraph 2.50.

Court Disposition

Application to amend Points of Defence dismissed except for uncontentious tidying up amendments.

Orders

  • Order made for uncontentious tidying up amendments to Points of Defence.
  • Application for main amendments to plead limitation of liability under 2015 contract dismissed.