Highways England Company Limited v BG Rodwell Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 118 (QB) (27 January 2017)

Highways England Company Limited v BG Rodwell Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 118 (QB) (27 January 2017)

The claim was sufficiently pleaded as the cause of action and title to sue were transferred to the claimant by statutory scheme; the amendment did not introduce a new cause of action but clarified standing; there was no basis for strike out or summary judgment; relief from sanctions for late costs budget was appropriate.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 118 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Highways England Company Limited; First Defendant: B. G. Rodwell Limited; Second Defendant: Robert Cheadle; Third Defendant: Allianz Insurance PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim (negligence, Property Damage) / Interlocutory Applications (strike Out, Relief From Sanctions, Permission to Amend)
Outcome
Defendants' application to strike out dismissed; claimant's applications for relief from sanctions and to amend particulars of claim allowed.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Vicarious Liability, Standing to Sue, Amendment of Pleadings, Relief From Sanctions, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Transfer of Cause of Action
Tort Law Civil Procedure Insurance Law Negligence Vicarious Liability Standing to Sue Amendment of Pleadings Relief From Sanctions +3 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 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Highways England Company Limited

Claimant

B. G. Rodwell Limited

First Defendant

Robert Cheadle

Second Defendant

Allianz Insurance PLC

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim (negligence, Property Damage) / Interlocutory Applications (strike Out, Relief From Sanctions, Permission to Amend)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant had standing to sue for damage caused before its existence
  2. 2 Whether the claim should be struck out or summary judgment granted for lack of standing
  3. 3 Whether permission to amend the Particulars of Claim should be granted after limitation period

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was sufficiently pleaded as the cause of action and title to sue were transferred to the claimant by statutory scheme; the amendment did not introduce a new cause of action but clarified standing; there was no basis for strike out or summary judgment; relief from sanctions for late costs budget was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Defendants' application to strike out dismissed; claimant's applications for relief from sanctions and to amend particulars of claim allowed.

Orders

  • Defendants' application dated 14 June 2016 dismissed
  • Claimant's application dated 24 June 2016 for relief from sanction allowed