The Supreme Court recently overturned a first-instance
court's decision to reject a request to amend a statement of
claim under Rule 25 of the Civil Procedure Rules on the grounds
that the amendment amounted to a new cause of
action.1
In its judgment, the first-instance court found that:
in this case the proposed amendment seeks to document events
which did not exist when the case was initially filed at the Court
and to introduce treatment which is different from the original
treatment sought which could not have been part of the remedies
that the claimant has put before the Court from the outset
οf the case.
The Supreme Court rejected this finding, basing its reasoning on
the differing cases of Gaber Alian Al Somrani Alias Gaber
Aliyan v The Cyprus Ship "Poseidonia"2
and Saba & Co (TMP) v TMP Agents.3 In the
first case, referring to the relevant English case law on the
matter, the Supreme Court restated the principle that the amendment
of a writ of summons