Clarion Housing Association Limited v Crest Nicholson Operations Limited
[2023] EWHC 620 (TCC)
The Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v Bellway Homes Limited & Anor
25 June 2024
[2024] EWHC 1579 (KB)
High Court
The claimants didn't serve their court papers on time, and the judge said they needed to do so properly. The judge didn't give them another chance to do it, but the defendants need to follow their own rules to challenge the case now.
Key Facts
- •Serious fire at Samuel Garside House on June 9, 2019.
- •Claimants are occupiers/former occupiers seeking damages for negligence and breach of statutory duty against Bellway Homes (developer/constructor) and Sheppard Robson.
- •Claim form issued June 6, 2022, against Bellway Homes and Sheppard Robson Architects LLP (incorrectly named).
- •Claimants sought to amend the second defendant's name to Sheppard Robson Limited and add minor claimants.
- •Defendants argued that service was invalid and claims were time-barred.
- •Various extensions of time for service were agreed and then disputed.
- •The Court of Appeal's decision in R (on the application of Rezq Allah Koro) v The County Court at Central London [2024] EWCA Civ 94 ('Koro') raised questions about the consequences of improper service.
Legal Principles
Overriding objective of dealing with cases justly and at proportionate cost.
CPR 1.1
Parties can vary CPR time limits by written agreement.
CPR 2.11
Court considers all circumstances when granting relief from sanctions, including efficient litigation and enforcement of rules.
CPR 3.9
Mandatory service on solicitor's business address when notified.
CPR 6.7
Rules for service by document exchange, post, fax, and email.
CPR PD 6A
Time limits for taking service steps and seeking extensions.
CPR 7.5, CPR 7.6
Time for service of Particulars of Claim.
CPR 7.4
Filing acknowledgments of service and consequences of not filing.
CPR 10
Disputing the court's jurisdiction.
CPR 11
Rules for amending statements of case, including adding or substituting parties.
CPR 17, CPR 19.6
Limitation Act 1980, sections 11, 33, 35; Limitation Act 1980 section 4B (inserted by Building Safety Act 2022).
Limitation Act 1980
Outcomes
Claimants' application for a declaration of valid service refused.
Claimants failed to comply with CPR 7.5 (service steps not taken in time) and no valid agreement to extend time existed.
Relief from sanctions refused.
Claimants did not take all reasonable steps to comply with CPR 7.5; no jurisdiction to grant relief outside CPR 7.6(3); serious and substantial breach with no good reason.
Defendants require permission to file acknowledgments of service out of time.
Claim Form, though served late, was not a nullity. CPR 10 and CPR 11 require acknowledgment of service, even with late service, to challenge jurisdiction; consistent with policy of speedy jurisdictional challenges.
Application to amend the name of the second defendant adjourned.
Jurisdictional issues to be addressed first; opportunity for Claimants to address evidentiary deficiencies; consistent with overriding objective.
Application for extension of time to serve Particulars of Claim adjourned.
Intertwined with jurisdictional issues and merits of the case; best addressed at a further hearing.