Maggistro-Contenta & Anor v O'Shea & Anor [2019] EWHC 3035 (Ch) (18 November 2019)

Maggistro-Contenta & Anor v O'Shea & Anor [2019] EWHC 3035 (Ch) (18 November 2019)

The claimant failed to serve particulars of claim within the required period, the breach was serious and significant, and the reasons advanced for the default were insufficient. The claim against Mr O'Shea lacked legal basis due to the timing of his appointment as administrator, and the claim against the LLP was unpromising. The merits of the claim did not justify granting an extension. The application for extension of time was refused and the claim was struck out.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 3035 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mrs Veline Hoie Maggistro-Contenta; Claimant: Mrs Veline Hoie Maggistro-Contenta (as Personal Representative of the late Giacomino Maggistro-Contenta); Defendant: Mr James Patrick O'Shea; Defendant: Jury O'Shea LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence Claim / Application for Extension of Time for Service of Particulars of Claim and Defendants' Application to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Claim struck out; application for extension of time refused.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Extension of Time, Breach of Duty, Administration of Estates, Professional Indemnity, Case Management
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Trusts and Estates Relief From Sanctions Extension of Time Breach of Duty Administration of Estates Professional Indemnity +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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Veline Hoie Maggistro-Contenta

Claimant

Mrs Veline Hoie Maggistro-Contenta (as Personal Representative of the late Giacomino Maggistro-Contenta)

Claimant

Mr James Patrick O'Shea

Defendant

Jury O'Shea LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Professional Negligence Claim / Application for Extension of Time for Service of Particulars of Claim and Defendants' Application to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant should be granted an extension of time for service of particulars of claim
  2. 2 Whether the claim should be struck out for non-compliance with CPR rules
  3. 3 Whether the claim against Mr O'Shea and Jury O'Shea LLP has real prospects of success

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to serve particulars of claim within the required period, the breach was serious and significant, and the reasons advanced for the default were insufficient. The claim against Mr O'Shea lacked legal basis due to the timing of his appointment as administrator, and the claim against the LLP was unpromising. The merits of the claim did not justify granting an extension. The application for extension of time was refused and the claim was struck out.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out; application for extension of time refused.

Orders

  • Application for extension of time for service of particulars of claim refused.
  • Claim struck out for non-compliance with CPR 7.4(2), CPR 7.8(1), PD7A paragraph 6.2, CPR 16.2(1)(a), and 16.2(2).