The Court granted leave to amend the statement of claim in part but refused leave to introduce a new 'Revised Working Group Amendment' alleging the defendant formed a cross-departmental working group tasked with finding a way to terminate a licence. The refusal was based on the lateness of the application (days before trial), the inevitability that the trial date would be vacated if the amendment were allowed, the breadth and seriousness of the new allegation requiring substantial investigation by the defendant, the inadequacy of the pleading and particulars, the absence of a satisfactory explanation for delay, and case management considerations including the inability to refix the trial within the calendar year. The Court emphasised that on the particular facts, the interests of justice were best served by refusing the amendment notwithstanding that it precluded the plaintiffs from pursuing the additional claim against a public authority.
The full text is available to signed-in members.