Captain Nigel Collingwood & Anor v Irwin Mitchell LLP

Captain Nigel Collingwood & Anor v Irwin Mitchell LLP

The claim was not clearly statute-barred at issue and should not be struck out or summarily dismissed on that basis. The claim was brought against the wrong defendant, as Irwin Mitchell LLP is not liable for the alleged acts of Thomas Eggar LLP absent novation or agreement. The naming of Irwin Mitchell LLP was a mistake as to party name, justifying substitution of Rhealisation LLP as defendant under CPR 19.6. The court exercised its discretion to permit substitution, striking out paragraphs asserting direct liability of Irwin Mitchell LLP.

Parties
Claimant: Captain Nigel Collingwood; Claimant: Edge Enviro Services Ltd; Defendant: Irwin Mitchell LLP (formerly Thomas Eggar LLP)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Professional Negligence / Ruling on Summary Judgment/strike Out and Substitution Application
Outcome
Application for summary judgment/strike out refused; application for substitution of defendant granted; paragraphs 4 and 5 of Particulars of Claim struck out.
Legal Topics
Limitation Period in Negligence, Substitution of Parties, Mistake in Party Identity, Successor Liability, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Professional Negligence Limitation of Actions Civil Procedure Limitation Period in Negligence Substitution of Parties Mistake in Party Identity Successor Liability Summary Judgment +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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Captain Nigel Collingwood

Claimant

Edge Enviro Services Ltd

Claimant

Irwin Mitchell LLP (formerly Thomas Eggar LLP)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Professional Negligence / Ruling on Summary Judgment/strike Out and Substitution Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim was statute-barred at the time of issue
  2. 2 Whether the claim was brought against the correct defendant
  3. 3 Whether substitution of Rhealisation LLP for Irwin Mitchell LLP should be permitted

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was not clearly statute-barred at issue and should not be struck out or summarily dismissed on that basis. The claim was brought against the wrong defendant, as Irwin Mitchell LLP is not liable for the alleged acts of Thomas Eggar LLP absent novation or agreement. The naming of Irwin Mitchell LLP was a mistake as to party name, justifying substitution of Rhealisation LLP as defendant under CPR 19.6. The court exercised its discretion to permit substitution, striking out paragraphs asserting direct liability of Irwin Mitchell LLP.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment/strike out refused; application for substitution of defendant granted; paragraphs 4 and 5 of Particulars of Claim struck out.

Orders

  • Claim not struck out or summarily dismissed on limitation grounds.
  • Irwin Mitchell LLP removed as defendant; Rhealisation LLP substituted as defendant.