The power to vary an interlocutory order before perfection, where the original reasons proceeded on incorrect assumptions of fact, is to be exercised with the interests of justice as the touchstone, taking into account finality of litigation and case management objectives. A party seeking variation is not entitled to the amendment merely because the opposing party cannot show the claim is unavailable as a matter of law; the court may refuse the variation on case management grounds including lateness, expansion of scope, and the availability of alternative remedies.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.