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 claim in deceit was statute-barred at the time of the amendment application and could not be added. The IMFAs were not executed as deeds but as simple contracts, so the 6-year limitation period applied. Claims for breach of contract and misrepresentation arising before 1 August 2007 were time-barred. The claimant could not rely on s.32 Limitation Act 1980 as the pleaded case was one of negligence, not deliberate concealment or fraud. The first defendant was permitted to withdraw its admission regarding execution as a deed. Summary judgment was granted to the first defendant on the limitation defence for pre-1 August 2007 claims.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 421 (QB)
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 Interlocutory Applications (summary Judgment, Amendment, Withdrawal of Admission, Security for Costs)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; permission to amend refused; withdrawal of admission granted; summary judgment granted for first defendant on limitation; security for costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Limitation of Actions, Summary Judgment, Amendment of Pleadings, Withdrawal of Admissions, Security for Costs, Contractual Estoppel
Contract Law Franchise Law Civil Procedure Misrepresentation Limitation of Actions Summary Judgment Amendment of Pleadings Withdrawal of Admissions +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 6 Authorities cited 20 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 Interlocutory Applications (summary Judgment, Amendment, Withdrawal of Admission, Security for Costs)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim in deceit is statute-barred and can be added by amendment
  2. 2 Whether the IMFAs were executed as deeds or simple contracts
  3. 3 Whether claims for breach of contract and misrepresentation are time-barred by limitation

Ratio Decidendi

The claim in deceit was statute-barred at the time of the amendment application and could not be added. The IMFAs were not executed as deeds but as simple contracts, so the 6-year limitation period applied. Claims for breach of contract and misrepresentation arising before 1 August 2007 were time-barred. The claimant could not rely on s.32 Limitation Act 1980 as the pleaded case was one of negligence, not deliberate concealment or fraud. The first defendant was permitted to withdraw its admission regarding execution as a deed. Summary judgment was granted to the first defendant on the limitation defence for pre-1 August 2007 claims.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; permission to amend refused; withdrawal of admission granted; summary judgment granted for first defendant on limitation; security for costs ordered.

Orders

  • Appeal against amendment order allowed and order reversed
  • Permission to amend to add claim in deceit refused