Venulum Property Investments Ltd v Space Architecture Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 1242 (TCC) (22 May 2013)

Venulum Property Investments Ltd v Space Architecture Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 1242 (TCC) (22 May 2013)

Permission to extend time for service of the Particulars of Claim was refused because the claimant had no good reason for the failure, the delay in bringing proceedings was unexplained and excessive, the claim against the Miller defendants was weak and poorly particularised, and the stricter post-Jackson approach to compliance required the court to refuse indulgence in such circumstances.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 1242 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Venulum Property Investments Ltd; Defendant: Space Architecture Limited; Defendant: MRP Developments Services Limited; Defendant: MRP Developments Limited; Defendant: Realacre Limited; Defendant: Mark Kevin Willmott; Defendant: Richard Stewart Anderson; Defendant: Robin John Ungemuth; Defendant: Abbeyross Limited; Defendant: Richard Miller; Defendant: Millers Estate Agents (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time for Service of Particulars of Claim / Post Issue, Pre Trial, Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time for Service of Particulars of Claim, Relief From Sanctions, Professional Negligence by Estate Agents and Architects, Limitation Periods, Bad Faith Allegations, Compliance With Civil Procedure Rules
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Construction Law Extension of Time for Service of Particulars of Claim Relief From Sanctions Professional Negligence by Estate Agents and Architects Limitation Periods Bad Faith Allegations +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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Venulum Property Investments Ltd

Claimant

Space Architecture Limited

Defendant

MRP Developments Services Limited

Defendant

MRP Developments Limited

Defendant

Realacre Limited

Defendant

Mark Kevin Willmott

Defendant

Richard Stewart Anderson

Defendant

Robin John Ungemuth

Defendant

Abbeyross Limited

Defendant

Richard Miller

Defendant

Millers Estate Agents (A Firm)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time for Service of Particulars of Claim / Post Issue, Pre Trial, Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant an extension of time for service of the Particulars of Claim under CPR 3.1(2)(a) and/or CPR 3.9
  2. 2 Whether the delay and failure to serve was excusable or justified
  3. 3 Whether the claim against the Miller defendants is sufficiently strong and particularised to merit indulgence

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to extend time for service of the Particulars of Claim was refused because the claimant had no good reason for the failure, the delay in bringing proceedings was unexplained and excessive, the claim against the Miller defendants was weak and poorly particularised, and the stricter post-Jackson approach to compliance required the court to refuse indulgence in such circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused

Orders

  • Permission to extend time for service of Particulars of Claim is refused
  • Claim against the Miller defendants cannot proceed