Sanders v Hampson

Sanders sought leave to amend his statement of claim against Hampson, which alleged breaches of contract and negligence resulting in personal injuries. The application was dismissed by the court, which held that the evidence provided was insufficient to justify the amendment.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiff had provided sufficient evidence to warrant an amendment to his statement of claim. The court needed to determine if the evidence provided by the plaintiff was adequate to support the claims of breach of contract and negligence against the defendant, Hampson.

In dismissing the application, the court held that the plaintiff had not demonstrated that the proposed amendments to his statement of claim would be likely to succeed. The plaintiff had relied on the principle of res ipsa loquitur to suggest that the defendant’s negligence was the likely cause of the injuries, but the court found that this principle did not apply. The plaintiff had not provided sufficient evidence to establish a causal link between the defendant's actions and the injuries claimed. Consequently, the court concluded that the application for leave to amend the statement of claim should be dismissed, with costs to be assessed.