Bethell Construction Ltd & Anor v Deloitte and Touche [2011] EWCA Civ 1321 (18 November 2011)

Bethell Construction Ltd & Anor v Deloitte and Touche [2011] EWCA Civ 1321 (18 November 2011)

The claim form was not validly served, nor was there waiver or estoppel by the respondent. The extension of time was validly terminated, and there was no good reason or exceptional circumstance to deem or dispense with service. The court had jurisdiction to award costs. The appeal was dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] EWCA Civ 1321
Parties
Appellant: Bethell Construction Limited; Appellant: Bethell Group PLC; Respondent: Deloitte and Touche
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Service of Claim Form, Extension of Time, Waiver and Estoppel, Limitation Act, Costs
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Service of Claim Form Extension of Time Waiver and Estoppel Limitation Act Costs

Source-derived case record

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bethell Construction Limited

Appellant

Bethell Group PLC

Appellant

Deloitte and Touche

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim form was validly served or constructively served
  2. 2 Whether the extension of time for service was validly terminated
  3. 3 Whether the respondent waived or was estopped from requiring proper service

Ratio Decidendi

The claim form was not validly served, nor was there waiver or estoppel by the respondent. The extension of time was validly terminated, and there was no good reason or exceptional circumstance to deem or dispense with service. The court had jurisdiction to award costs. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Bethells' application dismissed
  • Declaration that court had no jurisdiction to hear the claim