Where an amendment or cross-claim would require vacation of an imminent hearing date, the resulting prolongation of litigation constitutes prejudice not entirely met by a costs order, and the party seeking the indulgence must justify it by the strength of their case. A party seeking leave to file a cross-claim out of time who has previously failed to comply with court orders granting the same indulgence, and who offers no explanation for non-compliance, faces a heavy burden in establishing that the discretion should be exercised in their favour.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.