Charterhouse School v Hannaford Upright [2007] EWHC 2718 (TCC) (13 November 2007)

Charterhouse School v Hannaford Upright [2007] EWHC 2718 (TCC) (13 November 2007)

Permission to adduce expert quantity surveying evidence is granted only in relation to the valuation of remedial works attributable to admitted liability, due to fairness and minimal prejudice. All other applications to adduce expert evidence or amend the defence, including withdrawal of admissions and new factual...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 2718 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: The Governing Body of Charterhouse School; Defendant: Hannaford Upright
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application (application for Leave to Amend Defence and Adduce Expert Evidence)
Outcome
Partially allowed and partially refused
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Amendment of Pleadings, Withdrawal of Admissions, Betterment, Remedial Works, Commissioning and Recommissioning, Education (school Premises) Regulations 1999
Contract Law Construction Law Civil Procedure Expert Evidence Amendment of Pleadings Withdrawal of Admissions Betterment Remedial Works +2 more

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Governing Body of Charterhouse School

Claimant

Hannaford Upright

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application (application for Leave to Amend Defence and Adduce Expert Evidence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant should be granted leave to adduce expert quantity surveying evidence
  2. 2 Whether the defendant should be granted leave to amend its defence, including withdrawal of admissions and new factual allegations

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to adduce expert quantity surveying evidence is granted only in relation to the valuation of remedial works attributable to admitted liability, due to fairness and minimal prejudice. All other applications to adduce expert evidence or amend the defence, including withdrawal of admissions and new factual allegations, are refused due to lateness, lack of adequate explanation, risk of prejudice to the claimant, and jeopardy to the trial date.

Court Disposition

Partially allowed and partially refused

Orders

  • Permission granted to rely upon expert quantity surveying evidence limited to valuation of remedial works attributable to admissions of liability pleaded in the amended defence, with strict directions on service and response dates.
  • Permission to amend defence granted only for unopposed amendments and those relating to the 30-year requirement.