Qatar Investment and Project Development Holding Co & Anor v Phoenix Ancient Art S.A. & Ors
[2023] EWHC 1916 (KB)
Bonnier Books UK Group Holdings Limited & Ors v Haysmacintyre LLP
5 December 2022
[2022] EWHC 3170 (Comm)
High Court
A company sued its auditors, wanting to add a new complaint. The judge said no to the new complaint because it was too late, but said yes to adding details to the existing complaints, with a small correction.
Key Facts
- •Claimants (Bonnier Books UK Group Holdings Ltd et al) sought permission to amend their Particulars of Claim against defendant (Haysmacintyre LLP), an auditor.
- •The original claim was for breach of contract and negligence, alleging claimants wasted £65 million due to negligent audits.
- •Proposed amendments introduced a new claim alleging a duty to report findings to PwC Stockholm, beyond the existing duty to report to those charged with governance.
- •The amendments were opposed by the defendant on limitation grounds.
- •The claim related to financial years 2013-2016; the claim form was issued in September 2020.
- •A key issue was the definition of 'those charged with governance' under ISA 260.
Legal Principles
A new claim can be added via amendment only if it arises out of the same facts or substantially the same facts as the existing claim (CPR r. 17.4).
CPR r. 17.4
The policy underlying s. 35 and CPR r. 17.4 is to prevent a defendant from investigating matters unrelated to the original claim.
Mulally & Co Ltd v. Martlet Homes Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 32
A 'cause of action' is a factual situation entitling one person to a remedy against another.
Mulally & Co Ltd v. Martlet Homes Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 32; Letang v. Cooper [1965] 1 QB 322
Outcomes
Permission to amend was refused for the proposed new Section D(i) (duty to report to PwC Stockholm).
This introduced a new and freestanding duty, requiring significant new factual investigation outside the scope of the original claim, violating the policy of the Limitation Act and CPR r. 17.4.
Permission to amend paragraphs 46 and 50 was granted.
These amendments provided particularisation of existing claims and did not introduce new causes of action. Amendment to paragraph 50 was subject to refinement to remove ambiguity.
Similar Cases
Investment Bank PSC v Ahmad Mohammad El-Husseini & Ors
[2024] EWHC 1235 (Comm)
Allianz Funds Multi-Strategy Trust & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc
[2023] EWHC 2015 (Ch)
Steenbok Newco 10 Sarl & Anor v Formal Holdings Limited & Ors
[2024] EWHC 1160 (Comm)
Janice Anyon & Ors v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2024] EWHC 326 (KB)