P – Preliminary issue
17/4/24
VARIOUS CLAIMANTS v NEWS GROUP NEWSPAPERS LTD [2024] EWHC 902 (Ch)
The court refused to order a preliminary issue to determine whether the claimants’ claims were barred by s.32 Limitation Act because the claimants knew or could with reasonable diligence have known they had a worthwhile claim more than 6 years before the claim was issued. Considers principles to be applied and benefits of ordering preliminary issues. Here factors against included that the issue involved mixed questions of fact and law, difficulty in deciding which claims should be selected for the issue, the fact that determination of the issue would delay trial, the potential to increase costs, the potential splitting of key witness evidence between two hearings, the fact that the application had not been made earlier, and the adverse impact on matters of case management.
6/12/17
WENTWORTH SONS SUB-DEBT SARL v LOMAS [2017] EWHC 3158 (Ch)
Summarises principles to be applied in considering whether to order deter mination of a preliminary issue [32].
26/4/13
VARNEY v FORD MOTOR COMPANY LTD (Ch)
The court refused to order trial of a preliminary issue in large group litigation where to do so might lead to inappropriate assumptions being made at the main hearing, some witnesses might be required to give evidence twice, and it was likely to be quicker to have all issues decided at the same time.
31/1/13
ALDERSGATE ESTATES LTD v HAM CONSTRUCTION LTD [2013] EWHC 104 (TCC)
Considers when it may be appropriate to order determination of preliminary issues. Factors identified in Steele v Steele (2001) were not necessarily exclusive. Agreement of the parties would also be relevant. On the facts a preliminary issue on quantum was inappropriate having regard to the applicant’s delay and the fact that determination of the issue was unlikely to save costs or lead to settlement.