Writs had been issued within the limitation period, but then allowed to lapse. Held: Section 2D gave a wide discretion to the court which was not limited to a residual class of case or to exceptional cases.Ormrod LJ said: ‘The appellants contend that the section should be construed or applied not only strictly but, in … Continue reading Firman v Ellis: CA 1978
The plaintiff, then a 16 year old girl slipped and fell whilst employed at the defendant’s factory. The limitation period expired on her 21st birthday. She commenced proceedings five and a half months after that date. The judge extended time under LA section 33, holding that he could only consider prejudice suffered by the defendant … Continue reading Donovan v Gwentoys Ltd: HL 1990
The plaintiff was widow and administratrix of the estate of her deceased husband. He had worked from April 1938 to April 1943 for a predecessor to the CEGB. He had been exposed to asbestos dust as a result of his employer’s negligence and breach of duty. In 1981 he began to suffer mesothelioma, a long-delayed … Continue reading Arnold v Central Electricity Generating Board: HL 22 Oct 1987
The test of whether a plaintiff had sufficient knowledge to justify the start of time running against her takes into account her subjective characteristics but then applies an outsider’s view of what she should have thought.Geoffrey Lane LJ said in relation to section 2A(7): ‘[I]t is clear that the test is partly a subjective test, … Continue reading McCafferty v Metropolitan Police Receiver: CA 1977
