The decision concerns a dispute regarding the Panmar Trust, under which the Plaintiffs are beneficiaries and the Defendant was trustee. The Plaintiffs applied to reamend their pleadings to include an alternative claim for loss from willful and grossly negligent failure on the part of the Defendant to reinvest in a timely manner the proceeds of the sale of one of the important assets of the Trust, a ship.
In the Ruling, the Chief Justice briefly considered the recent English cases on applications for leave to amend pleadings. There it had been held that where a proposed amendment would likely result in the postponement of a trial and consequential undue hardship to the other side, that could not be compensated by the usual order for costs, the party seeking leave to amend has a ‘heavy onus’ to discharge. However, the Chief Justice declined to follow this approach, recognising that those recent English cases represented a much stricter English approach “post-CPR,” which has not been adopted by the Cayman courts (see Bodden -v- Thompson  (2) CILR 320).
To continue reading full articles in PDF format:
Lemos and Others -v- CIBC Bank and Trust Company (Cayman) Ltd. (Unreported) (20 February 2015)