Abdel Rahman v Chase Bank [1994] JLR 186 (03 June 1994)

Abdel Rahman v Chase Bank [1994] JLR 186 (03 June 1994)

Late amendments to pleadings on ancillary issues are not permitted after judgment on the central issue, especially where other parties have relied on the unamended pleadings and the public interest in efficient litigation outweighs the applicant's interests.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1994] JLR 186
Parties
Applicant: Abdel Rahman; Respondent: Chase Bank
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
03 June 1994
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Amend Pleadings Post Judgment
Outcome
application to amend pleadings refused
Legal Topics
Pleading, Amendment of Pleadings, Late Amendment, Finality of Judgment
Civil Procedure Pleading Amendment of Pleadings Late Amendment Finality of Judgment

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdel Rahman

Applicant

Chase Bank

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Amend Pleadings Post Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an extremely late amendment of pleadings on ancillary issues should be permitted after judgment on the central issue has been given

Ratio Decidendi

Late amendments to pleadings on ancillary issues are not permitted after judgment on the central issue, especially where other parties have relied on the unamended pleadings and the public interest in efficient litigation outweighs the applicant's interests.

Court Disposition

application to amend pleadings refused