The company sought to recover from the defendants, two former directors. Held: The claim was statute barred.Hodge QC dealt with the claimant’s reliance on section 32: ‘That leaves the claimant’s reliance upon section 32. There the difficulties that the claimant faces are that there are no facts sufficiently asserted to give rise, in my judgment, … Continue reading Burnden Holdings (UK) Ltd v Fielding and Another: ChD 5 Sep 2014
Flaux J summarised the principles to be applied when considering what discovery of a fraud was, and what was ‘reasonable diligence’ so as to set the limitation clock started. He observed that: ‘If section 32(1) involved a statutory assumption that the claimant was on notice of something meriting investigation, it would make it very difficult … Continue reading Granville Technology Group Ltd and Others v Infineon Technologies Ag and Another: ComC 25 Feb 2020
The defendant solicitor appealed refusal of an order to strike out the claim. The claimant alleged breach of trust. The claimant asserted a fraudulent witholding of information to suggest that any breach of trust had happened. The defendant said that the claimant had sufficient knowledge independent of any concealment to begin the limitation period. Held: … Continue reading Collins v Brebner: CA 19 Jun 1997
Concealment by Defendant after the event does not stop time running against Plaintiff. Citations: Times 01-Jul-1994, Independent 08-Jul-1994 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 32(1)(b) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Sheldon and Others v R H M Outhwaite (Underwriting Agencies) Ltd QBD 8-Dec-1993 Deliberate concealment could prevent the limitation period from running. . . … Continue reading Sheldon and Others v R H Outhwaite (Underwriting Agencies) Ltd and Others: CA 1 Jul 1994
The claimant had given instructions to the defendant with regard to a charge. The defendant came to know that he had made an error, and when asked by the claimant, declined to answer, and referred the claimant to independent advice. The claimant now said that this amounted to a concealment of the truth such as … Continue reading Ezekiel v Lehrer: ChD 21 Mar 2001
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
The claimant alleged that her solicitors had concealed from her the fact that they had entered a consent order which dismissed her claim for medical negligence. Held: The solicitor had failed to inform the client that her original claim against a doctor had been struck out although he was aware at the time that it … Continue reading Williams v Fanshaw Porter and Hazelhurst: CA 18 Feb 2004
The applicant claimed that his solicitor had been negligent with regard to the execution of a mortgage. The solicitor said his claim was time barred. The claimant said the solicitor had hidden the true situation from him, and the solicitor replied that he had merely refused to answer a question put to him, but had … Continue reading Ezekiel v Lehrer: CA 30 Jan 2002
A failure by an adviser to make his position clear when he thought he had been negligent, could constitute a ‘deliberate’ act within section 32 even if the defendant’s actions were not motivated by any intention to deceive the claimant: ‘it is not necessary for the purpose of extending the limitation period pursuant to Section … Continue reading James Brocklesby v Armitage and Guest (a Firm): CA 9 Jul 1999
Appeal by the claimants from the order of Simon J by which he ordered on summary judgment applications by the defendants that (1) the claimants are not entitled to rely on section 32(1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980; and the claims are time barred pursuant to sections 2 and 9 of the 1980 Act insofar … Continue reading Arcadia Group Brands Ltd and Others v Visa Inc and Others: CA 5 Aug 2015
An action for negligence against a solicitor was defended by saying that the claim was out of time. The claimant responded that the solicitor had not told him of the circumstances which would lead to the claim, and that deliberate concealment should extend the limitation period. Held: Brocklesby was wrongly decided. Section 32 should deprive … Continue reading Cave v Robinson Jarvis and Rolf (a Firm): HL 25 Apr 2002