Practice – Amendment. The claimant had brought proceedings in 2008 against the defendants. In 2010, the court had given judgment in the defendants' favour. In the present proceedings, the claimant contended that the 2010 judgment had been acquired as a result of fraud on the part of the defendants and sought permission to amend her particulars of claim to include a claim for damages for conspiracy/deceit. The Chancery Division held that the new claim was not an abuse of process, but that permission for the proposed amendments would not be granted as they included allegations not arising from the same or substantially the same facts as the claim itself.