The High Court set aside third-party proceedings brought by Topaz Energy Group Limited against Guardwell Lock and Safe Company Limited in a personal injuries claim involving a petrol station safe. Mr Justice Max Barrett delivered the judgment on 3 May 2019.
The plaintiff, Grainne McGeown, alleged that she was injured while closing the safe on or about 3 April 2014. Guardwell sought to have the third-party proceedings set aside, arguing that Topaz had missed the procedural deadline and had not served its notice as soon as reasonably possible, as required by section 27 of the Civil Liability Act 1961.
Topaz submitted that the timetable should take account of the plaintiff’s replies to particulars, which were delivered on 23 February 2017. Even on Topaz’s proposed calculation, the court said, there was a delay of about five months before its 20 October 2017 motion to join Guardwell. The court found that Topaz’s solicitors knew by 24 May 2017 that Guardwell had serviced the safe. Records held by Topaz were not provided to its solicitors until September, and the motion followed in October. The notice was served on 6 March 2018.
The judgment referred to the Court of Appeal’s decision in Kenny v Howard, which said that the statutory requirement must be considered in the context of the case as a whole. The court said that waiting for the client to provide records, then taking about four months to do so, followed by a further month before the motion, could not meet the requirement, even taking Topaz’s case at its highest.
The court also noted that the applicable 28-day period had expired on 28 July 2016 and that the third-party notice was not served until March 2018. It ordered the third-party proceedings set aside under Order 16, rule 8(3) of the Rules of the Superior Courts. The judgment did not determine the underlying personal injuries claim.