Scott & Ors v Singh [2020] EWHC 1714 (Comm) (27 August 2020)

Scott & Ors v Singh [2020] EWHC 1714 (Comm) (27 August 2020)

Permission to amend the Particulars of Claim was refused in respect of the new and expanded financial misrepresentation allegations and the negligent misstatement claim, as these amounted to new claims raised very late without good reason, would jeopardise the trial date, and were not of such strength as to justify the disruption. The amendments relating to representations implied from acceptance of draft warranties were also refused as unarguable. The structure of the fraud pleading was held adequate, but the negligent misstatement claim had no real prospect of success due to absence of a special relationship giving rise to a duty of care.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1714 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Andrew Pervis Scott; Claimant: Adam Lewis; Claimant: Bison Transport Limited (in liquidation); Defendant: Harbinder Singh
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Interlocutory Application for Permission to Amend Pleadings and Strike Out/summary Judgment
Outcome
Permission to amend refused in respect of new financial misrepresentation claims, negligent misstatement, and representations implied from draft warranties; permission otherwise granted for amendments that are further particularisation and do not jeopardise the trial date.
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Breach of Warranty, Fraudulent Misstatement, Negligent Misstatement, Amendment of Pleadings, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Commercial Law Contract Law Company Law Misrepresentation Breach of Warranty Fraudulent Misstatement Negligent Misstatement Amendment of Pleadings +2 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Pervis Scott

Claimant

Adam Lewis

Claimant

Bison Transport Limited (in liquidation)

Claimant

Harbinder Singh

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Interlocutory Application for Permission to Amend Pleadings and Strike Out/summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted to amend the Particulars of Claim to include new and expanded allegations of misrepresentation, breach of warranty, and breach of director's duties; Whether the amendments amount to new claims or merely further particularisation; Whether the amendments are pleaded with sufficient particularity; Whether the amendments have a real prospect of success; Whether permitting the amendments would jeopardise the trial date and, if so, whether justice requires permission; Whether the Defendant owed a duty of care for negligent misstatement; Whether representations can be implied from acceptance of draft warranties in share purchase agreements.

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to amend the Particulars of Claim was refused in respect of the new and expanded financial misrepresentation allegations and the negligent misstatement claim, as these amounted to new claims raised very late without good reason, would jeopardise the trial date, and were not of such strength as to justify the disruption. The amendments relating to representations implied from acceptance of draft warranties were also refused as unarguable. The structure of the fraud pleading was held adequate, but the negligent misstatement claim had no real prospect of success due to absence of a special relationship giving rise to a duty of care.

Court Disposition

Permission to amend refused in respect of new financial misrepresentation claims, negligent misstatement, and representations implied from draft warranties; permission otherwise granted for amendments that are further particularisation and do not jeopardise the trial date.

Orders

  • Claimants' application for permission to amend Particulars of Claim in respect of new financial misrepresentation claims, negligent misstatement, and representations implied from draft warranties is refused.
  • Permission granted for amendments that are further particularisation and do not jeopardise the trial date.