Steenbok Newco 10 Sarl & Anor v Formal Holdings Limited & Ors

Steenbok Newco 10 Sarl & Anor v Formal Holdings Limited & Ors

Permission to amend is refused because the proposed amendments are very late, extensive, and would require significant further pleadings, disclosure, and evidence, making it impossible to maintain the trial date. Allowing the amendments would cause serious procedural unfairness and deny the Defendants a fair opportunity to prepare for trial. The amendments introduce new causes of action, are not properly particularised, and in many instances are time-barred and do not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the existing claims.

Parties
Claimant: Steenbok Newco 10 SARL; Claimant: Ibex Retail Investments Limited; Defendant: Formal Holdings Limited; Defendant: Mr Malcolm King; Defendant: Mr Nicholas King
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Civil Claim / Pre Trial Review; Application for Permission to Amend Pleadings
Outcome
Application for permission to amend refused (save for agreed minor amendments and deletions).
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Limitation Periods, Foreign Law Claims, Fraud, Disclosure, Trial Preparation
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Conflict of Laws Amendment of Pleadings Limitation Periods Foreign Law Claims Fraud Disclosure +1 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 4 Authorities cited 47 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steenbok Newco 10 SARL

Claimant

Ibex Retail Investments Limited

Claimant

Formal Holdings Limited

Defendant

Mr Malcolm King

Defendant

Mr Nicholas King

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Civil Claim / Pre Trial Review; Application for Permission to Amend Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimants should be granted permission to make extensive amendments to their Re-Amended Particulars of Claim and Amended Claim Form shortly before trial
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendments constitute new causes of action and/or are time-barred
  3. 3 Whether the amendments would necessitate adjournment of the trial and cause procedural unfairness to the Defendants

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to amend is refused because the proposed amendments are very late, extensive, and would require significant further pleadings, disclosure, and evidence, making it impossible to maintain the trial date. Allowing the amendments would cause serious procedural unfairness and deny the Defendants a fair opportunity to prepare for trial. The amendments introduce new causes of action, are not properly particularised, and in many instances are time-barred and do not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the existing claims.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to amend refused (save for agreed minor amendments and deletions).

Orders

  • Permission to amend refused for the substantive proposed amendments.
  • Permission granted for agreed deletions and minor amendments as set out in the List of Agreed Amendments.