Strike Out, Amendment, and a New Statutory Cause of Action After Limitation
Ridgeway Foods Ltd owns a cold store destroyed by fire. It sues the electrical contractor, Volt & Cable Ltd, and the landlord, Harrow Estates Ltd, for negligence and breach of contract. The statement of case pleads that Volt & Cable 'failed to maintain the electrical system' but gives no dates, no identified defect, and no link to the fire. Harrow Estates applies to strike out the claim as disclosing no reasonable grounds and for failure to comply with a previous unless order requiring particulars. Meanwhile, Ridgeway discovers a report showing the fire started in a junction box installed by a sub-contractor, Arcwell Ltd, which was wound up 18 months ago. The limitation period for negligence expired three months ago, but a statutory claim with a potentially longer limitation period may be available. The trial window is in seven months. The client wants to 'add everyone and everything' and resist strike out.
1. Advise on the strike-out application. What is the strongest response and what weaknesses remain?
Read the worked answer
The strongest response is to oppose strike out and, in parallel, apply for permission to amend and for relief from the unless order. Strike out is a last resort: the court asks whether the statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds, or is an abuse, or shows a clear breach. A bare allegation that Volt & Cable 'failed to maintain' the system is weak because it does not identify the duty, the breach, the date or the causal link to the fire. The previous unless order is the greater danger: non-compliance with an unless order is usually treated as a sanction, and relief requires prompt application, a good explanation, and a meritorious claim. You should draft particulars using the fire investigation, maintenance records and expert evidence; offer to pay the costs of the strike-out application; and propose a timetable. Weaknesses: the claim has already been criticized, the trial window is only seven months away, and the court may find the breach inexcusable. Settling the strike-out on terms that allow amendment may be better than a contested hearing.
2. Can Ridgeway add Arcwell Ltd as a defendant and a new statutory claim after limitation? What must it show?
Read the worked answer
Adding Arcwell is not simply a pleading amendment. Because Arcwell is a new party, the court will ask whether the claim against it arises out of the same or substantially the same facts as the existing claim and whether the limitation rules permit relation back. The existing claim is about the fire and the electrical system, so a claim that Arcwell installed the defective junction box is likely to be substantially the same facts. But the new statutory claim may not relate back if it requires facts that were not already in issue, such as a different duty or a different damage period. Arcwell is also wound up, so you cannot sue it without restoring it to the register or obtaining permission; that adds time and cost. Practical steps: check the statutory threshold and limitation period; obtain the report and expert evidence; apply promptly; consider claims against Arcwell's insurers or former directors; and do not assume a longer limitation period without checking the precise statutory wording.
3. What case management directions should you seek at the next hearing to avoid trial date loss?
Read the worked answer
Ask for permission to amend the particulars and to add Arcwell, with a short deadline. Seek a split trial on liability if the fire causation evidence is complex. Request disclosure of maintenance and installation records, and permission for expert evidence on electrical causation. Ask for the unless order to be replaced with a realistic timetable rather than allowing it to operate as an automatic strike out. Offer costs of the amendment and of any adjournment caused by it. If the trial date cannot be kept, apply early for vacation or a later window; do not wait. Consider ADR on liability, and record that the client has been advised about the costs and limitation risks of adding parties.