Steele v Mooney & Ors

Steele v Mooney & Ors

A drafting error in an application for extension of time, omitting reference to the claim form but intended to include it, is a procedural error under CPR 3.10. Where such an application was made within the period for service, the court may correct the error and grant relief under CPR 3.10, as this does not circumvent the prohibition in CPR 7.6(3).

Parties
Appellant: Steele; Respondent: Mooney & Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Procedural Error, Service of Claim Form, CPR 3.10, CPR 7.6
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Procedural Error Service of Claim Form CPR 3.10 CPR 7.6

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steele

Appellant

Mooney & Ors

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a drafting error in an application for extension of time for service of particulars of claim, omitting reference to the claim form, is a procedural error under CPR 3.10
  2. 2 Whether CPR 3.10 can be used to correct such an error after the expiry of the period for service of the claim form
  3. 3 Whether the prohibition in CPR 7.6(3) applies to this situation

Ratio Decidendi

A drafting error in an application for extension of time, omitting reference to the claim form but intended to include it, is a procedural error under CPR 3.10. Where such an application was made within the period for service, the court may correct the error and grant relief under CPR 3.10, as this does not circumvent the prohibition in CPR 7.6(3).

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of Judge Rudd of 7 April 2004 set aside; order of Deputy District Judge Smith reinstated.
  • Order for costs varied: defendant to pay claimant’s costs of the appeal before Judge Rudd, set off against costs payable by claimant under Deputy District Judge Smith’s order.