Klenk And Ors v The Betesh Partnership Solicitors & Anor

Klenk And Ors v The Betesh Partnership Solicitors & Anor

There is an almost complete factual overlap between the original and amended claims; the judge's exercise of discretion was within the broad ambit conferred and disclosed no error of principle, irrationality, or omission of relevant factors.

Parties
Applicants: Klenk and others; Respondents: The Betesh Partnership Solicitors; Respondent: Michael Hewitt
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (renewal)
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Case Management Discretion, Collective Investment Schemes, Limitation of Actions
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Financial Regulation Amendment of Pleadings Case Management Discretion Collective Investment Schemes Limitation of Actions

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

Parties

Klenk and others

Applicants

The Betesh Partnership Solicitors

Respondents

Michael Hewitt

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (renewal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed amendment constituted a new claim
  2. 2 Whether the new claim arose out of the same or substantially the same facts as the original claim
  3. 3 Whether the judge properly exercised discretion in allowing a late amendment

Ratio Decidendi

There is an almost complete factual overlap between the original and amended claims; the judge's exercise of discretion was within the broad ambit conferred and disclosed no error of principle, irrationality, or omission of relevant factors.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application refused