Convergence Group Plc & Anor v Vellacott

Convergence Group Plc & Anor v Vellacott

The proposed re-amendments, while introducing a new claim, arise out of substantially the same facts as the claim already pleaded because they relate to a continuous course of conduct under a single retainer concerning the same subject matter. Therefore, the requirements of CPR 17.4(2) are satisfied and permission to re-amend should be granted.

Parties
Appellant: The Convergence Group PLC; Appellant: Convergence Group International SA; Respondent: Chantrey Vellacott
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court Regarding Permission to Re Amend Defence and Counterclaim
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Limitation of Actions, Civil Procedure Rules (cpr), Permission to Appeal
Civil Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Limitation of Actions Civil Procedure Rules (cpr) Permission to Appeal

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

Parties

The Convergence Group PLC

Appellant

Convergence Group International SA

Appellant

Chantrey Vellacott

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court Regarding Permission to Re Amend Defence and Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed re-amendments to the Defence and Counterclaim introduce a 'new claim' within the meaning of CPR 17.4(2)
  2. 2 If so, whether the new claim arises out of the same or substantially the same facts as the claim already pleaded
  3. 3 Whether permission to appeal should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed re-amendments, while introducing a new claim, arise out of substantially the same facts as the claim already pleaded because they relate to a continuous course of conduct under a single retainer concerning the same subject matter. Therefore, the requirements of CPR 17.4(2) are satisfied and permission to re-amend should be granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Proposed re-amendments to the Defence and Counterclaim allowed