Rose & Ors v Creativityetc Ltd & Ors

Rose & Ors v Creativityetc Ltd & Ors

Permission to re-amend the Particulars of Claim to allege fraud and seek rescission of the mortgages is refused. The application is late, would require the case to be restarted, and the new claims are weak and likely to fail, especially in light of the Claimants' prior election to seek redemption and their express representations to the court and Defendants. Only minor clarificatory amendments are permitted.

Parties
Claimant: David Michael Rose; Claimant: David Philip Waxman; Claimant: Dreadnought Limited; Claimant: Karunia Holdings Limited; Claimant: Palador Investments Limited; Defendant: Creativityetc Limited; Defendant: Stephen Conn; Defendant: Edward Gee
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil (property, Trusts, and Probate) / Application for Permission to Re Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Permission to re-amend refused (except for minor clarificatory amendments)
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Rescission of Mortgages, Election, Res Judicata, Abuse of Process, Redemption of Mortgages
Civil Procedure Property Law Trusts Equity Amendment of Pleadings Fraudulent Misrepresentation Rescission of Mortgages Election +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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Michael Rose

Claimant

David Philip Waxman

Claimant

Dreadnought Limited

Claimant

Karunia Holdings Limited

Claimant

Palador Investments Limited

Claimant

Creativityetc Limited

Defendant

Stephen Conn

Defendant

Edward Gee

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (property, Trusts, and Probate) / Application for Permission to Re Amend Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted to re-amend the Particulars of Claim to allege fraud and seek rescission of mortgages
  2. 2 Whether the proposed re-amendment is properly pleaded and has real prospects of success
  3. 3 Whether the claim is precluded by election, res judicata, estoppel, or abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to re-amend the Particulars of Claim to allege fraud and seek rescission of the mortgages is refused. The application is late, would require the case to be restarted, and the new claims are weak and likely to fail, especially in light of the Claimants' prior election to seek redemption and their express representations to the court and Defendants. Only minor clarificatory amendments are permitted.

Court Disposition

Permission to re-amend refused (except for minor clarificatory amendments)

Orders

  • Permission to re-amend Particulars of Claim refused except for paragraphs 20A, 23, 23B, 23C, and 25 (subject to reformulation)
  • Directions to hear submissions on reformulation at handing down of judgment