The Court held that the addition of a plaintiff pursuant to O 18 r 6 RSC takes effect from the date of amendment of the writ, not the original date of issue, and therefore any limitation defence available to the defendants is preserved. There is no distinction between plaintiffs and defendants in this regard. The Court further held that the requirement of 'necessity' under O 18 r 6(2)(b) is broad enough to encompass case management considerations including minimising time and costs, and the fact that proposed plaintiffs could issue fresh proceedings does not preclude their addition to existing proceedings where consolidation would be impractical.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.