Harrington & Charles Trading Company Limited (In Liquidation) & Ors v Mehta & Ors

Harrington & Charles Trading Company Limited (In Liquidation) & Ors v Mehta & Ors

The challenged amendments do not amount to withdrawal of admissions requiring court permission. Even if they did, permission would be granted under CPR 14.5, considering the evolving pleadings, expert evidence, absence of prejudice, and interests of justice.

Parties
Claimant: Harrington & Charles Trading Company Limited (In Liquidation) and others; Defendant: Mehta and Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Paragraphs of Re Amended Defence and Counterclaim at Fifth Case Management Conference
Outcome
Application to strike out paragraphs of the Re-Amended Defence and Counterclaim is rejected.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Withdrawal of Admissions, Fraud Allegations, Tracing of Proceeds, Expert Evidence
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Amendment of Pleadings Withdrawal of Admissions Fraud Allegations Tracing of Proceeds Expert Evidence

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harrington & Charles Trading Company Limited (In Liquidation) and others

Claimant

Mehta and Others

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Paragraphs of Re Amended Defence and Counterclaim at Fifth Case Management Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether amendments in the Re-Amended Defence and Counterclaim constitute withdrawal of admissions requiring court permission
  2. 2 Whether the court should strike out paragraphs alleged to withdraw admissions
  3. 3 Whether the amendments are permissible in light of evolving pleadings and expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The challenged amendments do not amount to withdrawal of admissions requiring court permission. Even if they did, permission would be granted under CPR 14.5, considering the evolving pleadings, expert evidence, absence of prejudice, and interests of justice.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out paragraphs of the Re-Amended Defence and Counterclaim is rejected.

Orders

  • Permission granted for the Re-Amended Defence and Counterclaim in the form served.