The University applied to have struck out the claim by the claimant for damages alleging negligence in its teaching leading to a lower class degree than he said he should have been awarded. Held: Strike out on the basis that the claim was bound to fail was refused. Nor was the claim bound to fail … Continue reading Siddiqui v University of Oxford: QBD 5 Dec 2016
In 1987, and before the claim was issued in 1992 the claimant had issued a claim which had never been served. She sought to extend the limitation period arguing that she had not acquired the requisite knowledge until later, Held: She had had the requisite knowledge in 1985. Waite LJ observed that her issue of … Continue reading Whitfield v North Durham Health Authority: CA 1995
Judges: Dyson LJ, Maurice Kay LJ Citations: [2008] EWCA Civ 758 Links: Bailii Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 14(1)(c) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270564
The claimants sought damages after the birth of their child with a severe hereditary disease which they said the defendant hospital had failed to diagnose after testing for that disease. The hospital sought a contribution from the company CSL who had carried out the test. The third party said that the claim was out of … Continue reading Farraj and Another v King’s Healthcare NHS Trust and Another: QBD 26 May 2006
The test of ‘When a plaintiff became aware of the cause of an injury’ is a subjective test of what passed through plaintiff’s mind. ‘(1) the knowledge required to satisfy s14(1)(b) is a broad knowledge of the essence of the causally relevant act or omission to which the injury is attributable; (2) ‘attributable’ in this … Continue reading Spargo v North Essex District Health Authority: CA 13 Mar 1997
May LJ said: ‘Knowledge’ is an ordinary English word with a clear meaning to which one must give full effect; ‘reasonable belief’ or ‘suspicion’ is not enough. The relevant question merits repetition – ‘when did the appellant first know that his dermatitis was capable of being attributed to his conditions at work?.’ May LJ Unreported, … Continue reading Davis v Ministry of Defence: CA 26 Jul 1985
The plaintiff was treated for depression by the defendant by prescription of drugs. She sufferred a reaction, but now claimed that the doctor’s slow reaction caused her to suffer lasting injury. The question on appeal was, if a plaintiff suffers injuries some of which the plaintiff knows to be attributable to the act or omission … Continue reading Roberts vWinbow (3): CA 4 Dec 1998
The plaintiff sought damages for the negligence of the respondent in her care at birth. Years later the family concluded that her condition was a result of negligence. They waited until she was 21, when they mistakenly believed that she became an adult, and made a claim. Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. The court had … Continue reading O’Driscoll v Dudley Health Authority: CA 30 Apr 1998
The plaintiff had a lump on her breast. The surgeon, without first subjecting the lump to a microscopic examination in order to determine whether it was cancerous or benign, removed the breast. This was in 1973. The lump was subsequently found to be benign. The patient knew very soon after the operation that the lump … Continue reading Dobbie v Medway Health Authority: CA 11 May 1994
The claimant’s bungalow suffered subsidence. Repair works were undertaken as advised by the defendants, but unsuccessfully. The claimant’s insurers instructed experts negotiators to investigate with a view to a claim. The defendants now claimed the action was out of time, since the knowledge of the defects acquired by the loss adjusters was to be imputed … Continue reading Graham v Entec Europe Ltd (T/A Exploration Associates): CA 6 Aug 2003
The claimant had undergone heart surgery as an infant in 1976, and claimed damages for professional negligence. The procedure involved a dangerous procedure, a resection of coarctation. As a consequence, the Claimant suffered a number of problems associated with neurological deficit and partial paraplegia. Held: As to limitation, the knowledge required to satisfy s.14(1)(b) is … Continue reading Mirza v Birmingham Health Authority: QBD 31 Jul 2001
The defendant appealed a decision allowing a claim to proceed more than ten years after it had been suffered. The claimant’s hearing had been damaged after an officer threw a thunderflash into his trench on an exercise. Held: The defendant’s appeal was allowed. ‘If a claimant can bring himself within section 11(4)(b), then he can … Continue reading McCoubrey v Ministry of Defence: CA 24 Jan 2007
The claimant sought damages from his accountants, claiming negligence. The accountants pleaded limitation. They had advised him in connection with an investment in a company which investment went wrong. Held: It was argued that the limitation period was to be extended until three years after the discovery by the claimant of why it was that … Continue reading Haward and others v Fawcetts: HL 1 Mar 2006
The claimant sought to counter a defence that his claim was out of time, saying that he had been misinformed as to the name of his employer. Held: A person could not sue simply ‘his employer’. He must find a name, particularly as against a limited company, to begin his action. The claimant had been … Continue reading Cressey v E Timm and Son Ltd and E Timm and Son Holding Ltd: CA 24 Jun 2005
The limitation period starts when a reasonable person would have sought medical help. Section 14(1)(b) requires that ‘one should look at the way the plaintiff puts his case, distil what he is complaining about and ask whether he had in broad terms knowledge of the facts on which that complaint is based’ at the appropriate … Continue reading Broadley v Guy Clapham and Co: CA 9 Sep 1993
The claimant sought damages for a breach of duty by his teachers which had happened before 1991. He argued that 3(1) of the HRA should affect the construction of section 14(1) of the 1980 Act. [2003] EWCA Civ 1281, [2003] ELR 771 Bailii Limitation Act 1980 14 33, Human Rights Act 1980 14(1) England and … Continue reading Rowe v Kingston-Upon-Hull City Council and Another: CA 24 Jul 2003
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
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
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
