Simpsons (Preston) Limited (Trading as Simpsons) & Anor. v MS Amlin Underwriting Limited

Simpsons (Preston) Limited (Trading as Simpsons) & Anor. v MS Amlin Underwriting Limited

The Claimants failed to demonstrate that the discovery of additional disclosure material amounted to a significant development under CPR3.15A. The evidence did not sufficiently explain why the increased disclosure burden was not anticipated or why it was significant. The application to vary the costs budget was therefore dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Simpsons (Preston) Limited (trading as Simpsons); Claimant: Nesco Trade LLP; Defendant: MS Amlin Underwriting Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Application to Vary Costs Management Order
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs Management, Disclosure Obligations, Business Interruption Insurance, COVID 19 Litigation
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Costs Management Disclosure Obligations Business Interruption Insurance COVID 19 Litigation

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simpsons (Preston) Limited (trading as Simpsons)

Claimant

Nesco Trade LLP

Claimant

MS Amlin Underwriting Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Application to Vary Costs Management Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the discovery of additional disclosure material constitutes a 'significant development' under CPR3.15A justifying variation of the costs budget
  2. 2 Whether the application to vary was made promptly

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimants failed to demonstrate that the discovery of additional disclosure material amounted to a significant development under CPR3.15A. The evidence did not sufficiently explain why the increased disclosure burden was not anticipated or why it was significant. The application to vary the costs budget was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application to vary the costs management order is dismissed
  • Parties to agree consequential matters or a further hearing will be convened