McKinney Plant & Safety Ltd v Construction Industry Training Board [2022] EWHC 2361 (Ch) (20 September 2022)

McKinney Plant & Safety Ltd v Construction Industry Training Board [2022] EWHC 2361 (Ch) (20 September 2022)

The supplemental witness statement McKinney 2 was in serious breach of PD 57AC, with the majority of its content non-compliant. The Claimant's failure to engage with the Defendant's concerns and the court's directions justified an order permitting service of an amended statement (McKinney 2.1) only if it was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2361 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: McKinney Plant & Safety Ltd; Defendant: The Construction Industry Training Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Pre Trial Review (ptr) and Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application granted in part; permission to serve amended witness statement subject to conditions; indemnity costs awarded to Defendant.
Legal Topics
Witness Statements, Practice Direction 57 AC, Relief From Sanctions, Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Witness Statements Practice Direction 57 AC Relief From Sanctions Costs Orders

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

McKinney Plant & Safety Ltd

Claimant

The Construction Industry Training Board

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Pre Trial Review (ptr) and Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the supplemental witness statement of Mr Michael McKinney (McKinney 2) complies with Practice Direction 57AC
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant should be permitted to serve an amended witness statement (McKinney 2.1)
  3. 3 Whether relief from sanctions is required for late or non-compliant evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The supplemental witness statement McKinney 2 was in serious breach of PD 57AC, with the majority of its content non-compliant. The Claimant's failure to engage with the Defendant's concerns and the court's directions justified an order permitting service of an amended statement (McKinney 2.1) only if it was properly cross-referenced to documents and accompanied by a list of documents seen. The seriousness of the breach and the Claimant's conduct warranted an order for indemnity costs in favour of the Defendant.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; permission to serve amended witness statement subject to conditions; indemnity costs awarded to Defendant.

Orders

  • Claimant granted permission to file an amended Supplemental Witness Statement of Michael McKinney (McKinney 2.1) by 21 September 2022, cross-referenced to all relied-upon documents and with a list of documents seen.
  • Claimant to provide a comparison between McKinney 2 and McKinney 2.1 to the Defendant and include it in the trial bundle.