When a proposed late amendment introduces causes of action based on a materially different factual inquiry from the original claims, the absence of correlation between the factual matrices is a powerful factor supporting refusal, even where the events arise from the same incident. The respondent's inability to investigate the new factual issues years after the event constitutes irremediable prejudice. A change of counsel forming a different view of the appropriate causes of action does not constitute a satisfactory explanation for delay in seeking amendment.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 26 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 26 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.