Sigley and De Santis & Ors (No 4)

In *Sigley and De Santis & Ors (No 4)*, heard before Wilson J, the applicant sought leave to amend their CAMSOC (Concise Statement of Material Facts) while the trial was well underway. The parties were reportedly "log jammed" on the issue of pleading amendments, with the applicant's latest proposed version being described as imprecise and unclear, and advancing allegations akin to fraud.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant the applicant leave to replead in terms of their proposed amendment, which was considered problematic. The court was required to determine the appropriate course of action given the late stage of the proceedings and the nature of the proposed amendments.

Wilson J refused leave to make the amendments as proposed on 19 October 2020, finding them to be insufficiently precise. However, the applicant was granted leave to further amend the CAMSOC, with a deadline set for filing and serving any further proposed amended CAMSOC. Any arguments regarding leave arising from this further amended document were adjourned, and costs thrown away by reason of the application were reserved.