Hi and nice to hear from you again.
IMO going for a second bite of the cherry would have been fraught with risk as it may well have been regarded as an abuse of process.
A judge, assessing and balancing all the circumstances of the case. could well regard the second claim as being something which should have been raised in the original claim.
After all, the second case would be based on identical arguments and facts as the first, saving only the amount claimed.
The risk was not in the soundness of your original claim (altho' I seem to recall there were many doubters!) but the risk of it being struck out and damages awarded against you.
But what do I know compared to a lawyer?
IMO going for a second bite of the cherry would have been fraught with risk as it may well have been regarded as an abuse of process.
A judge, assessing and balancing all the circumstances of the case. could well regard the second claim as being something which should have been raised in the original claim.
After all, the second case would be based on identical arguments and facts as the first, saving only the amount claimed.
The risk was not in the soundness of your original claim (altho' I seem to recall there were many doubters!) but the risk of it being struck out and damages awarded against you.
But what do I know compared to a lawyer?
Comment