Startwell Ltd v Energie Global Brand Management Ltd & Anor [2015] EWHC 421 (QB) (23 February 2015)

Startwell Ltd v Energie Global Brand Management Ltd & Anor [2015] EWHC 421 (QB) (23 February 2015)

The appeal was allowed because the claim in deceit was a new claim for limitation purposes and did not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the existing claim in negligent misrepresentation. The limitation period for deceit had expired before the application to amend, so permission to amend could not be granted. The IMFAs were not executed as deeds but as simple contracts, so the 6-year limitation applied. Claims for breaches before 1 August 2007 and for misrepresentation were statute-barred. The first defendant was permitted to withdraw its admission regarding execution as a deed. Summary judgment was granted on the time-barred claims. Security for costs was ordered.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 421
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Startwell Limited; First Defendant/appellant: Energie Global Brand Management Limited; Second Defendant/appellant: Energie Global Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Franchise Dispute (civil) / Appeal and Applications for Summary Judgment, Withdrawal of Admission, and Security for Costs
Outcome
Appeal allowed; permission to amend to plead deceit refused; withdrawal of admission permitted; summary judgment granted on time-barred claims; security for costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Limitation of Actions, Summary Judgment, Withdrawal of Admissions, Security for Costs, Contractual Estoppel, Execution of Deeds
Contract Law Franchise Law Civil Procedure Misrepresentation Limitation of Actions Summary Judgment Withdrawal of Admissions Security for Costs +2 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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Startwell Limited

Claimant/respondent

Energie Global Brand Management Limited

First Defendant/appellant

Energie Global Limited

Second Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Franchise Dispute (civil) / Appeal and Applications for Summary Judgment, Withdrawal of Admission, and Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's application to amend to plead fraudulent misrepresentation (deceit) was statute-barred under the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether the International Master Franchise Agreements (IMFAs) were executed as deeds or simple contracts
  3. 3 Whether the claims for breach of contract and misrepresentation were time-barred

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the claim in deceit was a new claim for limitation purposes and did not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the existing claim in negligent misrepresentation. The limitation period for deceit had expired before the application to amend, so permission to amend could not be granted. The IMFAs were not executed as deeds but as simple contracts, so the 6-year limitation applied. Claims for breaches before 1 August 2007 and for misrepresentation were statute-barred. The first defendant was permitted to withdraw its admission regarding execution as a deed. Summary judgment was granted on the time-barred claims. Security for costs was ordered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; permission to amend to plead deceit refused; withdrawal of admission permitted; summary judgment granted on time-barred claims; security for costs ordered.

Orders

  • Appeal against permission to amend to plead deceit allowed and Master's order reversed
  • Permission to withdraw admission regarding execution as a deed granted