Free Leisure Ltd (t/a "Cirque Le Soir") v Peidl And Company Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 792 (Comm) (03 April 2023)

Free Leisure Ltd (t/a "Cirque Le Soir") v Peidl And Company Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 792 (Comm) (03 April 2023)

The Claim Form contained no facts and failed to comply with CPR 16.2(1). The Letter of Claim and Particulars of Claim could not be used to cure this defect, as they were served after limitation had expired and did not arise out of facts stated in the Claim Form. There was no jurisdiction to permit amendment after limitation had expired. The claim was therefore struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds and being time-barred.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 792 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Free Leisure Ltd (T/A 'Cirque Le Soir'); First Defendant: Peidl and Company Ltd (now dissolved); Second Defendant: QBE UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim (negligence, Breach of Contract, Insurance) / Application to Strike Out Claim or for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Pleadings, Third Party (rights Against Insurers) Act 2010, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Contract Law Tort Law Limitation of Actions Pleadings Third Party (rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 Summary Judgment +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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Free Leisure Ltd (T/A 'Cirque Le Soir')

Claimant

Peidl and Company Ltd (now dissolved)

First Defendant

QBE UK Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim (negligence, Breach of Contract, Insurance) / Application to Strike Out Claim or for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claim Form disclosed reasonable grounds for bringing the claim
  2. 2 Whether the Claim Form complied with CPR 16.2(1)
  3. 3 Whether the claim was time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980

Ratio Decidendi

The Claim Form contained no facts and failed to comply with CPR 16.2(1). The Letter of Claim and Particulars of Claim could not be used to cure this defect, as they were served after limitation had expired and did not arise out of facts stated in the Claim Form. There was no jurisdiction to permit amendment after limitation had expired. The claim was therefore struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds and being time-barred.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out

Orders

  • Claim struck out against both Defendants
  • No leave to amend the Claim Form granted