Manchester Airport PLC & Anor v Radisson Hotel Manchester Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 3739 (Ch) (23 November 2020)

Manchester Airport PLC & Anor v Radisson Hotel Manchester Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 3739 (Ch) (23 November 2020)

The application to admit Mr Coburn's witness statement was refused because the First Defendant's failure to comply with the court's order was serious and significant, lacked satisfactory explanation, and admitting the evidence would prejudice the Claimants and undermine efficient case management.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 3739 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Manchester Airport PLC; Claimant: MAG Investment Assets Limited; First Defendant: Radisson Hotel Manchester Ltd; Second Defendant: Union Investment Real Estate GmbH
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Civil Proceedings / Application for Permission to Rely on Late Witness Evidence at Preliminary Issue Hearing
Outcome
Application refused in part, granted in part
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Late Service of Witness Statements, Interpretation of Lease Terms, Case Management
Civil Procedure Property Law Relief From Sanctions Late Service of Witness Statements Interpretation of Lease Terms Case Management

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manchester Airport PLC

Claimant

MAG Investment Assets Limited

Claimant

Radisson Hotel Manchester Ltd

First Defendant

Union Investment Real Estate GmbH

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application in Civil Proceedings / Application for Permission to Rely on Late Witness Evidence at Preliminary Issue Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Defendant should be granted permission to rely on the late witness statement of Richard Coburn
  2. 2 Whether the Denton principles for relief from sanctions apply to the application
  3. 3 Whether admitting the evidence would cause prejudice or disrupt case management

Ratio Decidendi

The application to admit Mr Coburn's witness statement was refused because the First Defendant's failure to comply with the court's order was serious and significant, lacked satisfactory explanation, and admitting the evidence would prejudice the Claimants and undermine efficient case management.

Court Disposition

Application refused in part, granted in part

Orders

  • Permission granted to rely on Mr Sadr-Hashemi's second witness statement, with costs to be Claimants' costs in the case.
  • Permission refused to rely on Mr Coburn's witness statement.