Click the case name for better results:

Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office: CA 11 Nov 2004

In 2002 the SFO was investigating allegations that drug companies were selling generic drugs, including penicillin-based antibiotics and warfarin, to the National Health Service at artificially sustained prices. To further the investigation the SFO obtained search warrants and executed them. The company challenged the release of the documents recovered to other government departments. They had … Continue reading Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office: CA 11 Nov 2004

Phillips and Co (A Firm) v Bath Housing Co-Operative Ltd: CA 11 Dec 2012

The defendant appealed against a order finding it was liable for the fees claimed by its former solicitors. They had said that the claim for costs was barred by limitation. Held: The defendant’s appeal failed; a solicitor’s claim for his costs, billed but not yet fixed by assessment or agreement, fell within the phrase ‘debt … Continue reading Phillips and Co (A Firm) v Bath Housing Co-Operative Ltd: CA 11 Dec 2012

Haward and Others v Fawcetts (A Firm) and Another: CA 11 Mar 2004

The court looked at the date from which the limitation period ran in an action for professional negligence: ‘It is clear from the words of the section itself . . that it is concerned with knowledge of facts, as opposed to knowledge of matters of law. In particular, subsection (9) specifically excludes knowledge that the … Continue reading Haward and Others v Fawcetts (A Firm) and Another: CA 11 Mar 2004

Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria: QBD 8 Apr 2011

The claimant had been defrauded by a customer of the defendant bank. He brought a claim against the bank, saying that they knew or ought to have known of the fraudster’s activities, and were liable. The Bank denied that the UK courts had jurisdiction saying in particular that no claim arose because it would be … Continue reading Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria: QBD 8 Apr 2011

Legal Services Commission v Henthorn: QBD 4 Feb 2011

The claimant sought to recover overpayments said to have been made to the defendant barrister in the early 1990s. Interim payments on account had been made, but these were not followed by final accounts. The defendant, now retired, said that the claims were defeated by limitation and laches and were an abuse of process because … Continue reading Legal Services Commission v Henthorn: QBD 4 Feb 2011

Mortgage Corporation v Lambert and Co (A Firm) and Another: ChD 11 Oct 1999

Estimates of the real values of houses which had been taken as security for loans were not sufficiently precise to forewarn a lender of the damage resulting from earlier negligent valuations, and accordingly the lender was not fixed with notice by the estimates, and time did not begin to run against them. Citations: Times 11-Oct-1999 … Continue reading Mortgage Corporation v Lambert and Co (A Firm) and Another: ChD 11 Oct 1999

Lloyd’s Bank Plc v Rogers and Another: QBD 11 Apr 1996

Claim may be added outside limitation period where based on same facts. Citations: Times 11-Apr-1996 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 35 Citing: Appealed to – Lloyds Bank Plc v Rogers and Another CA 20-Dec-1996 An out of time claim for defamation was allowed after late disclosures by the defendant bank in the case. . . Cited … Continue reading Lloyd’s Bank Plc v Rogers and Another: QBD 11 Apr 1996

Regina v Her Majesty’s Coroner at Hammersmith ex parte Peach: CA 1980

A coroner was obliged to sit with a jury under the section 13(2) of the 1926 Act where the deceased, who was watching a demonstration, was struck a violent blow on the back of his head from which he died.Bridge LJ said: ‘The key to the nature of that limitation is to be found, I … Continue reading Regina v Her Majesty’s Coroner at Hammersmith ex parte Peach: CA 1980

Abela and Others v Baadarani and Another: ChD 28 Jan 2011

The claimant sought damages alleging inter alia fraud by the defendant in a company sale between the parties. The defendant now sought to have set aside the service on him in Lebanon, saying that The English court was not the forum coveniens. He also said that the claim was out of time. Held: The application … Continue reading Abela and Others v Baadarani and Another: ChD 28 Jan 2011

Parissis v Blair Court St Johns Wood Management Ltd: UTLC 11 Nov 2014

UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – service charges – application by tenant under section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for a determination of the service charges payable in respect of periods more than six years prior to the date of application – preliminary decision of LVT finding appellant time barred on basis of … Continue reading Parissis v Blair Court St Johns Wood Management Ltd: UTLC 11 Nov 2014

Ofulue and Another v Bossert: HL 11 Mar 2009

The parties disputed ownership of land, one claiming adverse possession. In the course of negotations, the possessor made a without prejudice offer to purchase the paper owner’s title. The paper owner claimed that this was an acknowledgement under section 29. Held: The letter should not be admitted. Any admission in the first letter could not … Continue reading Ofulue and Another v Bossert: HL 11 Mar 2009

Hamilton and others v Allied Domecq Plc (Scotland): HL 11 Jul 2007

The pursuers had been shareholders in a company which sold spring water. The defenders took shares in the company in return for promises as to the promotion and distribution of the bottled water. The pursuers said that they had failed to promote it in the way promised. The company failed. At first instance the judge … Continue reading Hamilton and others v Allied Domecq Plc (Scotland): HL 11 Jul 2007

Chambers v London Borough of Havering: CA 20 Dec 2011

The defendant appealed against an order for him to surrender possession of land he had claimed by adverse possession. The Council was the registered proprietor. The defendant said he had used the land since 1981 for dumping of motor vehicle parts. The judge had decided that the defendant had not established factual possession for the … Continue reading Chambers v London Borough of Havering: CA 20 Dec 2011

Bowling and Co Solicitors v Edehomo: ChD 2 Mar 2011

The court was asked ‘when an innocent vendor whose signature is forged on the documents for the conveyance of land suffers damage, for the purposes of limitation of an action arising from a solicitor’s breach of duty. Is it on the exchange of contracts, in which case the present claim is said to be time … Continue reading Bowling and Co Solicitors v Edehomo: ChD 2 Mar 2011

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council: SC 6 Apr 2011

The land-owner had planning permission to erect a barn, conditional on its use for agricultural purposes. He built inside it a house and lived there from 2002. In 2006. He then applied for a certificate of lawful use. The inspector allowed it, and the Council appealed. The Council now also argued that parliament could not … Continue reading Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council: SC 6 Apr 2011

National Ability Sa v Tinna Oils and Chemicals Ltd: CA 11 Dec 2009

Implied promise to pay arbitral award The parties disputed how limitation affects the enforcement of an arbitration award. More than six years had passed since the award had been made, and the defendant said it was out of time. Held: A party can enforce an award either by ordinary action as an action founded upon … Continue reading National Ability Sa v Tinna Oils and Chemicals Ltd: CA 11 Dec 2009

Pegasus Management Holdings Sca and Another v Ernst and Young (A Firm) and Another: ChD 11 Nov 2008

The claimants alleged professional negligence in advice given by the defendant on a share purchase, saying that it should have been structured to reduce Capital Gains Tax. The defendants denied negligence and said the claim was statute barred. Held: The defence in fact was that the claimant had both brought the claim too early because … Continue reading Pegasus Management Holdings Sca and Another v Ernst and Young (A Firm) and Another: ChD 11 Nov 2008

Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent): HL 1966

The House gave guidance how it would treat an invitation to depart from a previous decision of the House. Such a course was possible, but the direction was not an ‘open sesame’ for a differently constituted committee to prefer their views to those of the committee which determined the decision unanimously or by a majority. … Continue reading Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent): HL 1966

Green v Eadie and Others: ChD 18 Nov 2011

The claimant as PR of her husband’s estate sought damages for misrepresentation and, against his former solicitiors for negligence in regards to the boundaries of a property he had bought from the first defendants using the second defendants as his solicitors. The first defendant said the claim was time barred. The six year period had … Continue reading Green v Eadie and Others: ChD 18 Nov 2011

Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another; Coogan v Same: ChD 25 Feb 2011

The claimants said that agents of the defendant had unlawfully accessed their mobile phone systems. The court was now asked whether the agent (M) could rely on the privilege against self incrimination, and otherwise as to the progress of the case. The claimant asserted that their claim was an intellectual property claim, allowing section 72 … Continue reading Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another; Coogan v Same: ChD 25 Feb 2011

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

Horne-Roberts (a Child) v Smithkline Beecham plc and Another: CA 18 Dec 2001

The court has a power to order substitution of a party though the limitation period, and even the ‘long stop’ limitation period had expired. The claimant child sought damages after a vaccination. The batch had been attributed to the wrong manufacturer, and the error only came to light outside the limitation period. It was said … Continue reading Horne-Roberts (a Child) v Smithkline Beecham plc and Another: CA 18 Dec 2001

Sniezek v Bundy (Letchworth) Limited: CA 7 Jul 2000

The claimant appealed against a finding that having once already issued a claim, a second claim was out of time, not accepting that she had had the knowledge effective to commence the limitation period. Held: Judge LJ had ‘difficulty in perceiving how in any case where a claimant has sought advice and taken proceedings, it … Continue reading Sniezek v Bundy (Letchworth) Limited: CA 7 Jul 2000

Norman v Ali and Another, Norman v Aziz: CA 13 Jan 2000

The claimant sought damages following a road accident against an uninsured driver through the Motor Insurer’s Bureau. The Bureau later required him to issue proceedings also against the car owner on the ground that he had permitted the driving. At first it was held the limitation period was six years for such a claim, but … Continue reading Norman v Ali and Another, Norman v Aziz: CA 13 Jan 2000

Gaud v Leeds Health Authority: CA 14 May 1999

A claim against an employer for a failure to give advice which might have mitigated personal injury is not itself a claim for personal injuries, and so is subject to the normal three year limitation period. Citations: Times 14-May-1999 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 11 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Personal Injury, Limitation Updated: 10 May 2022; … Continue reading Gaud v Leeds Health Authority: CA 14 May 1999

Deerness v John R Keeble and Son (Brantham) Ltd: HL 1983

The plaintiff suffered very serious injuries as a passenger in a car, and a writ was issued within the three-year period against the driver and the owner of the car whose insurers made a substantial interim payment. The writ was not served, nor renewed at the end of 12 months, and the limitation period expired … Continue reading Deerness v John R Keeble and Son (Brantham) Ltd: HL 1983

Greater Manchester Police v Carroll: CA 1 Dec 2017

The Police appealed from a finding that the claim brought by a former constable was not out of time. He had worked under cover making drugs purchases, and had become addicted to heroin. Held: The appeal failed. Judges: Sir Terence Etherton MR Citations: [2017] EWCA Civ 1992, [2018] 4 WLR 32, [2017] WLR(D) 818 Links: … Continue reading Greater Manchester Police v Carroll: CA 1 Dec 2017

Collins v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills and Others: CA 23 May 2014

The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for personal injury which had been rejected on basis that it was out of time. He had contracted cancer in 2002, but had recovered. He later came to attribute this to exposure to asbestos at work in the docks up to 1967. He made his claim in … Continue reading Collins v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills and Others: CA 23 May 2014

Young v Downey: QBD 18 Dec 2019

Responsibility for IRA bombing fixed The claimant sought a finding that the defendant had been responsible for a IRA bombing in 1982 which killed her father and three other soldiers and injured 31 others. He had been acquitted at a criminal trial. Held: The limitation period was extended: ‘As was said in Carroll, the burden … Continue reading Young v Downey: QBD 18 Dec 2019

Ministry of Defence v AB and Others: SC 14 Mar 2012

The respondent Ministry had, in 1958, conducted experimental atmospheric explosions of atomic weapons. The claimants had been obliged as servicemen to observe the explosions, and appealed against dismissal of their claims for radiation sickness under the 1980 Act. They said that they had only acquired the knowledge to found an action in 2007 on the … Continue reading Ministry of Defence v AB and Others: SC 14 Mar 2012

A v Hoare; H v Suffolk County Council, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening; X and Y v London Borough of Wandsworth: CA 12 Apr 2006

Each claimant sought damages for a criminal assault for which the defendant was said to be responsible. Each claim was to be out of the six year limitation period. In the first claim, the proposed defendant had since won a substantial sum from the National Lottery. They complained that the Limitation Act gave the court … Continue reading A v Hoare; H v Suffolk County Council, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening; X and Y v London Borough of Wandsworth: CA 12 Apr 2006

O’Byrne v Aventis Pasteur Sa: SC 26 May 2010

The claimant wished to claim damages after suffering serious injury as a child having been vaccinated with a drug manufactured by a defendant (APMSD). The defendant had relied on a defence saying that the limitation period under the Directive was 10 years. The claimant had then to choose another company (APSA) as defendant. On a … Continue reading O’Byrne v Aventis Pasteur Sa: SC 26 May 2010

Forbes v Wandsworth Health Authority: CA 21 Mar 1996

The plaintiff had a history of circulatory problems in his legs. He underwent surgery losing his leg. The question was when he should have sought advice as to why an attempted by-pass operation had resulted in one leg having to be amputated. He enquired why only some 10 years after the event. He was told … Continue reading Forbes v Wandsworth Health Authority: CA 21 Mar 1996

McDonnell and Another v Walker: CA 24 Nov 2009

The defendant appealed against the disapplication of section 11 of the 1980 Act under section 33. Held: The appeal succeeded. The defendant had not contributed significantly to the delay: ‘the defendant received claims quite different in magnitude from anything notified to them before, almost seven years to the day after the accident, and where there … Continue reading McDonnell and Another v Walker: CA 24 Nov 2009

Inglewood Investments Company Ltd v Baker: CA 8 Nov 2002

The court considered a claim for the adverse possesion of land. Held: Dyson LJ said: ‘to establish a claim of adverse possession for the requisite period of 12 years it is necessary to establish: (1) actual possession; (2) an intention to possess. That has two elements. First a subjective element requiring the person, the trespasser, … Continue reading Inglewood Investments Company Ltd v Baker: CA 8 Nov 2002

Miller and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union: SC 24 Jan 2017

Parliament’s Approval if statute rights affected In a referendum, the people had voted to leave the European Union. That would require a notice to the Union under Article 50 TEU. The Secretary of State appealed against an order requiring Parliamentary approval before issuing the notice, he saying that the notice could be given under the … Continue reading Miller and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union: SC 24 Jan 2017

Fenech v East London and City Health Authority: CA 2000

The court was asked how to set the time at which the claimant became fixed with knowledge of her injury. They ‘found it unnecessary to attempt any final reconciliation, because ‘on any sort of objective approach’ the claimant should have made inquiries long before she did. ‘ Judges: Simon Brown LJ, Robert Walker LJ and … Continue reading Fenech v East London and City Health Authority: CA 2000

Wilkinson and Another v West Bromwich Building Society: CA 30 Jul 2004

The Society had repossessed and sold the mortgagors’ house in 1990. It knew then that there was a shortfall, but took no further recovery proceedings until 2002. What was the date from which the relevant limitation period began to run? Though the deed provided for payment of monthly instalments, it did not include an express … Continue reading Wilkinson and Another v West Bromwich Building Society: CA 30 Jul 2004

Buckler v J F Finnegan Ltd: CA 21 Jun 2004

The claimant sought damages for personal injuries after ingesting asbestos while employed as a joiner by the defendant. The defendant appealed an order allowing the claim to go ahead despite being out of time. Citations: [2004] EWCA Civ 920 Links: Bailii Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 33 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – KR and … Continue reading Buckler v J F Finnegan Ltd: CA 21 Jun 2004

Parsons and Another v George and Another: CA 13 Jul 2004

The claimant sought to begin proceedings to renew his business tenancy, but the proceedings were issued in the wrong name. He sought to amend the proceedings to substitute the correct defendant, but that application was out of time. Held: Proceedings under the 1954 Act were not within the proceedings listed by CPR 19.5 since the … Continue reading Parsons and Another v George and Another: CA 13 Jul 2004

Collin v Duke of Westminster: CA 1985

In 1975 the tenant sought to exercise his right to purchase the freehold reversion of his property. The landlord argued that the rent payable precluded any such entitlement. Under the law as then understood, the landlord’s contention appeared correct. The leaseholder proceeded no further. In 1980 the law was clarified so as to indicate that … Continue reading Collin v Duke of Westminster: CA 1985

Various Claimants v MGN Ltd: ChD 27 May 2022

Judges: The Hon Mr Justice Fancourt Citations: [2022] EWHC 1222 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 32(1)(b) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.678298

McDonnell v Congregation of Christian Brothers Trustees (Formerly Irish Christian Brothers) and others: HL 4 Dec 2003

In 2000, the claimant sought damages for sexual abuse from before 1951. The issue was as to whether the limitation law which applied was that as at the date of the incidents, or that which applied as at the date when he would be deemed uner the modern law to have acquired knowledge of the … Continue reading McDonnell v Congregation of Christian Brothers Trustees (Formerly Irish Christian Brothers) and others: HL 4 Dec 2003

Munjaz v Mersey Care National Health Service Trust And the Secretary of State for Health, the National Association for Mental Health (Mind) Respondent interested;: CA 16 Jul 2003

The claimant was a mental patient under compulsory detention, and complained that he had been subjected to periods of seclusion. Held: The appeal succeeded. The hospital had failed to follow the appropriate Code of Practice. The Code was not obligatory, but following it would generally ensure that a patient’s rights were not infringed. It recognised … Continue reading Munjaz v Mersey Care National Health Service Trust And the Secretary of State for Health, the National Association for Mental Health (Mind) Respondent interested;: CA 16 Jul 2003

Sage v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and others: HL 10 Apr 2003

The appellant had challenged an enforcement notice requiring him to pull down a partially built house. The issue was when the four year limitation period had commenced. Did the four year limitation period commence when the works were complete, or when the building was complete? Held: The inspector had found the building to be a … Continue reading Sage v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and others: HL 10 Apr 2003

Bristol and West plc v Bartlett and Another; Paragon Finance plc v Banks; Halifax plc v Grant: CA 31 Jul 2002

The defendants resisted claims by lenders for the payment of mortgage debts. In each case the lender had exercised the power of sale before issuing proceedings for possession. The defendants queried the limitation period applicable. Held: The exercise of the power of sale did not mean that the original mortgage debt changed. The recovery of … Continue reading Bristol and West plc v Bartlett and Another; Paragon Finance plc v Banks; Halifax plc v Grant: CA 31 Jul 2002

Steedman, Clohosy, Smith, Kiernan, Newman, Creevy, Anderson v The British Broadcasting Corporation: CA 23 Oct 2001

The claimants had issued defamation proceedings. The defendant said they were out of time, having begun the action more than one year after the alleged publication, but accepted that they had not been prejudiced in their defence. The court refused to extend the period. The lack of prejudice to the defendant was not in itself … Continue reading Steedman, Clohosy, Smith, Kiernan, Newman, Creevy, Anderson v The British Broadcasting Corporation: CA 23 Oct 2001

Companhia De Seguros Imperio v Heath (REBX) Ltd and Others: CA 20 Jul 2000

Although a claim for breach of fiduciary duty, as a claim in equity, was not subject to the same limitation periods imposed by the Act as claims in tort or contract, a court exercising an equitable jurisdiction should apply similar periods under the equitable principle of acquiescence. A six year limitation period should be applied … Continue reading Companhia De Seguros Imperio v Heath (REBX) Ltd and Others: CA 20 Jul 2000

London Borough of Hillingdon v ARC Limited (No 2): CA 16 Jun 2000

The council entered upon land belonging to the company in accordance with the compulsory purchase procedures in 1982, but the company did not bring its claim for compensation until 1992. The council said the were out of time. Held: Section 9 applies to claims for compensation for compulsory purchase. The mere fact that a party … Continue reading London Borough of Hillingdon v ARC Limited (No 2): CA 16 Jun 2000

A B and others v Liverpool City Council; Nugent Care Society (Formerly Catholic Social Services [Liverpool]) and Trustees of National Children’s Home and Orphanage Registered: CA 15 Jun 1998

Citations: [1998] EWCA Civ 1000 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – McDonnell and Another v Walker CA 24-Nov-2009 The defendant appealed against the disapplication of section 11 of the 1980 Act under section 33. Held: The appeal succeeded. The defendant had not contributed significantly to the delay: ‘the defendant received claims … Continue reading A B and others v Liverpool City Council; Nugent Care Society (Formerly Catholic Social Services [Liverpool]) and Trustees of National Children’s Home and Orphanage Registered: CA 15 Jun 1998

London Borough of Hillingdon v ARC Limited: CA 7 Apr 1998

The company sought compensation for land taken under compulsory purchase powers by the defendants several years before. It now appealed against the defeat of its claim as time-barred. Held: The appeal failed. The limitation period for a claim for a compensation payment runs from the date of the entry into possession of the land by … Continue reading London Borough of Hillingdon v ARC Limited: CA 7 Apr 1998

Parsons v Warren and Another: CA 31 Jan 2002

Appeal from a judgment that the claim for damages for industrial disease, commenced by the respondent against the appellants had been brought by the respondent within three years of his date of knowledge for the purposes of section 11(4) and section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980, and that, in any event, he would override … Continue reading Parsons v Warren and Another: CA 31 Jan 2002

Swansea City Council v Glass: CA 1992

The defendant had failed himself to repair his property, and the Local Authority carried out the work itself under the 1957 Act. It sought to recover the associated costs from the defendant, but he said that their claim was time barred, being more than six years after the work had been concluded. The authority argued … Continue reading Swansea City Council v Glass: CA 1992

Legal Services Commission v Rasool: CA 5 Mar 2008

The defendant had in 1993 obtained legal aid. Work was done but the certificate was then revoked. The Commission sought repayment of the sums paid on account to his solicitors. He replied that the claim was out of time. The Commission argued that time did not run until the sum was fixed. Held: The Commission’s … Continue reading Legal Services Commission v Rasool: CA 5 Mar 2008

Test Claimants In The Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Inland Revenue: SC 23 May 2012

The European Court had found the UK to have unlawfully treated differently payment of franked dividends between subsidiaries of UK companies according to whether all the UK subsidiaries were themselves UK based, thus prejudicing European subsidiaries, breach of EU Treaty guarantees of freedom of establishment and of movement of capital. The court was now asked … Continue reading Test Claimants In The Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Inland Revenue: SC 23 May 2012

Hill (As Trustee In Bankruptcy of Nurkowski) v Spread Trustee Company Ltd and Another: CA 12 May 2006

The defendants sought relief for transactions entered into at an undervalue. The bankrupt had entered into charges and an assignment of a loan account in their favour before his bankruptcy, and the trustee had obtained an order for them to be set aside as a fraud on his creditors. Held: To have such orders set … Continue reading Hill (As Trustee In Bankruptcy of Nurkowski) v Spread Trustee Company Ltd and Another: CA 12 May 2006

Warwickshire Hamlets Ltd and Another v Gedden and Others: UTLC 26 Mar 2010

UTLC SERVICE CHARGES – jurisdiction of leasehold valuation tribunal – construction of lease – whether rent payable by a management company in respect of the common parts recoverable as part of the service charge – Limitation Act 1980 s.21 Citations: [2010] UKUT 75 (LC) Links: Bailii Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 21 Jurisdiction: England and Wales … Continue reading Warwickshire Hamlets Ltd and Another v Gedden and Others: UTLC 26 Mar 2010

J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Another v Caroline Graham and Another: CA 6 Feb 2001

Where a tenant under a grazing license had stayed over after the end of the tenancy, and had been refused a renewed licence, and had continued to graze the land for over twelve years, the mere overstaying was not enough to evidence an animus possidendi, an intention to assert an interest contrary to that of … Continue reading J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Another v Caroline Graham and Another: CA 6 Feb 2001

Personal Representatives of Tang Man Sit v Capacious Investments Ltd: PC 18 Dec 1995

The claimant, Capacious Investments Ltd, brought proceedings against Tang’s estate for damages for the loss of use and occupation, and also an account of profits and damages for loss and damage incurred, for example by encumbering the property with leases. It obtained an account of profits and an award of compensatory damages as a result … Continue reading Personal Representatives of Tang Man Sit v Capacious Investments Ltd: PC 18 Dec 1995

Lowsley and Another v Forbes (Trading As I E Design Services): HL 29 Jul 1998

The plaintiffs, with the leave of the court, had obtained garnishee and charging orders nisi against the debtor 11 and a half years after they had obtained a consent judgment. Held: An application by the judgment debtor to set aside the orders on the ground that they were statute barred under section 24(1) should be … Continue reading Lowsley and Another v Forbes (Trading As I E Design Services): HL 29 Jul 1998

C v Mirror Group Newspapers and Others: CA 21 Jun 1996

Husband and wife were involved in a custody dispute. The father made serious but false allegations to the press. She now claimed in defamation, but he relied upon limitation. She said the facts had only become known to her much later. Held: ‘Facts relevant to cause’ referred to those facts necessary to be pleaded but … Continue reading C v Mirror Group Newspapers and Others: CA 21 Jun 1996

Regina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 16 Feb 2001

The claimants challenged the instruction that they must squat whilst undergoing a strip search in prison. A dog search had given cause to supect the presence of explosives in the wing, and the officers understood that such explosives might be hidden anally. Held: The common thread in all the cases has been the search to … Continue reading Regina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 16 Feb 2001

Marco (Croydon) Ltd v Metropolitan Police Commissioner: QBD 1983

The defendant company traded as A and J Bull Containers. They hired out a builder’s skip which was left out, unlit, on the highway at night. A cyclist rode into it and died. An information was laid against ‘A J Bull Ltd’, charging an offence under the Highways Act 1980. The hearing took place after … Continue reading Marco (Croydon) Ltd v Metropolitan Police Commissioner: QBD 1983

Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd: HL 1979

The plaintiff tried to bring a second action in respect of an industrial injury claim outside the limitation period so as to overcome the likelihood that his first action, although timeous, would be dismissed for want of prosecution. Held: He could not do so. He was not prejudiced by the primary limitation period since he … Continue reading Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd: HL 1979