‘These appeals raise questions as to the correct approach to the application of section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 in the light of the decision of the House of Lords in A v Hoare [2008] UKHL 6, [2008] 1 AC 844. Each appeal arises out of allegations of historic sexual abuse at a children’s … Continue reading AB and Others v Nugent Care Society: CA 29 Jul 2009
The landlord of a block of flats needed vacant possession to pursue redevelopment. The respondent solicitors failed to give the necessary notice in good time, delaying the development by a year. The landlord appellant delayed five years before claiming damages, and now appealed against denial of his claim, arguing that section 11 produced in the … Continue reading Dunlop v McGowans: HL 6 Mar 1980
Citations: [1998] EWCA Civ 1328 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 5 6 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation, Contract Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.144807
The respondent Bain was a director of a number of connected companies, including Smarturgent and Pantone, both of which he indirectly controlled. The liquidator of both companies brought proceedings against Bain on a number of claims for breach of duty as a director, including that he had caused Smarturgent to spend a total of over … Continue reading In re Pantone 485 Ltd: ChD 29 Nov 2001
(Australia) Lord Wilbeforce said: ‘A breach of a repudiatory character . . entitles the innocent party, unless he waives the breach, to claim to be released from further performance of his obligations under the contract. So far their Lordships of course agree. One of these obligations, counsel proceeded to argue, was to bring any action … Continue reading Port Jackson Stevedoring Pty. Limited v Salmond and Spraggon (Australia) Pty. Limited: PC 10 Jul 1980
The plaintiff appealed a finding that she had sufficient knowledge of her possible claim for medical negligence against the defendants, and that she was out of time. She had known of her condition, but said she had no sufficient reason to see that it might have arisen from the negligence now found. Held: The court … Continue reading Smith v Leicestershire Health Authority: CA 29 Jan 1998
LRA KEYWORDS – Adverse possession claim – Schedule 6 to the Land Registration Act 2002 – effect of Sections 96 and 97 of the 2002 Act – acknowledgment of title – Section 29 of the Limitation Act 1980 – Without prejudice’ correspondence – whether privileged – alleged perjury Citations: [2008] EWLandRA 2008 – 0321 Links: … Continue reading Michael Walton v Kerguelen Investments Limited (Practice and Procedure): LRA 22 Dec 2008
LRA Adverse possession – locus standi of a person not having an interest in the land – adding new parties – holding a substantive hearing in absence of a party – Limitation Act 1980 Section 15; Schedule 1, paragraphs 1 and 8 – Land Registration Act 2002 Schedule 4; Adjudicator to Her Majesty’s Land Registry … Continue reading Arnold and Arnold v Roughton Land Trust Musker and Musker, (Practice and Procedure): LRA 5 Nov 2007
JE, wife of DE, who had been taken into residential care by the Local authority, said that the authority had infringed his Article 5 and 8 rights on transferring him between homes. The authority asserted that he did not have mental capacity. She asserted that his retention in care was an unlawful detention. Judges: Munby … Continue reading Re DE, JE v DE, Surrey County Council and EW: FD 29 Dec 2006
The claimants appealed an order finding that the defendant had acquired their land by adverse possession. They said that the defendant had asserted in defence to possession proceedings that they were tenants, and that this contradicted an intent to deny the claimants’ title. Held: The appeal failed. A finding by the ECHR that a particular … Continue reading Ofulue and Another v Bossert: CA 29 Jan 2008
The company owner eventually made a positive decision not to take any possession proceedings against the occupiers following service of a notice to quit. The occupiers then remained in possession for more than 12 years. Held: After serving a notice to quit the owner did not take any further steps to obtain possession, even after … Continue reading Batsford Estates (1983) Company Ltd v Taylor and Another: CA 29 Apr 2005
The claimant had issued proceedings against the deceased after his death, but before a personal representative had been appointed. They later discontinued and re-issued against the person appointed by the court to defend the action. The defendant then said the proceedings were an abuse of process, and pleaded a limitation defence. Held: The deceased was … Continue reading Piggott v Aulton (Deceased): CA 29 Jan 2003
The landlord’s agents wrote to the proposed tenant offering a quarterly tenancy of the premises. The tenancy was to commence at a future date. The defendant endorsed the letter and returned it to say he would abide by the terms, and he was allowed into possession. He ceased to pay rent, and eventually came to … Continue reading Long v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council: ChD 29 Mar 1996
The claimant sought damages for conversion from the respondent auctioneers as bailees. The painting had been registered as stolen. It failed to achieve its reserve and had been returned. Held: It was for a bailee to prove that he had acted in good faith. That meant that he was not aware that the person for … Continue reading Marcq v Christe Manson and Woods (t/a Christies): QBD 29 Oct 2002
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
Supreme Court of Canada – Limitation of actions – Torts – Assault and battery – Incest – Woman bringing action against father for damages for incest – Whether or not action limited by Limitations Act – Application of the reasonable discoverability principle – Whether or not incest a separate and distinct tort – Limitations Act, … Continue reading KM v HM: 29 Oct 1992
After landlord’s claim for service charge struck out for want of prosecution, and tenant continued with amended counterclaim, Landlord’s revival of his claim by way of set off was an equitable claim and was outside the rules of the Limitation Acts. Citations: Gazette 29-Jul-1998 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 36(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Equity Updated: … Continue reading Filross Securities Ltd v Midgley: CA 29 Jul 1998
The buyer bought 30lbs of cabbage seed, but the seed was not correct, and the crop was worthless. The seed cost pounds 192, but the farmer lost pounds 61,000. The seed supplier appealed the award of the larger amount and interest, saying that their contract limited their liability to the cost of the seed. Held: … Continue reading George Mitchell (Chesterhall) Ltd v Finney Lock Seeds Ltd: CA 29 Sep 1982
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
EAT National Minimum Wage – Unlawful Deduction – National minimum wage – unauthorised deduction from wages – section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996 – sections 9 and 39 Limitation Act 1980 The Claimant had successfully claimed that the Respondent had failed to pay him at national minimum wage rates and, at the subsequent Remedies Hearing … Continue reading Coletta v Bath Hill Court (Bournemouth) Property Management Ltd: EAT 29 Mar 2018
The claimant challenged fines imposed on him after three illegal immigrants were found to have hidden in his lorry in the immigration control zone at Dunkirk. The 1999 At was to have been amended by the 2002 Act, and the implementation was by the 2002 Order. That Order was now said to be ineffective. Held: … Continue reading Bogdanic v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: QBD 29 Aug 2014
Interpretation of Exclusion Clauses The plaintiffs had contracted with the defendants for the provision of a night patrol service for their factory. The perils the parties had in mind were fire and theft. A patrol man deliberately lit a fire which burned down the factory. It was an unresolved issue whether the employee intended to … Continue reading Photo Production Ltd v Securicor Transport Ltd: HL 14 Feb 1980
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
The plaintiff, on arriving at the airport found that his luggage had been lost. The defendant denied liability saying he had not notified his claim within the requisite period.
Held: Elementary justice requires that the rules by which the . .
References: (1992) 96 DLR (4th) 289, [1992] 3 SCR 6, 14 CCLT (2d) 1, AZ-92111111, EYB 1992-67549, JE 92-1644, [1992] SCJ No 85 (QL), 36 ACWS (3d) 466, 57 OAC 321 Links: Canlii Coram: La Forest, L’Heureux-Dube, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ Supreme Court of Canada – Limitation of actions – Torts – … Continue reading KM v HM; 29 Oct 1992
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
The borrower fell into arrears when he lost his job. Benefits payments were made toward the debt under the 1992 Act. Those stopped, and the house was repossessed. The property was sold, and the claimant eventually sought to recover the shortfall. They relied on the last benefits payment as acknowledgement of the debt, saying it … Continue reading Bradford and Bingley Plc v Cutler: CA 18 Jan 2008
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
The case concerned a quantum meruit claim under a building contract. Even though the basis of the claim lies in statute, nonetheless an agreement must be treated as an ‘acknowledgment’ of a ‘liquidated pecuniary claim’ for the purpose of the section, and limitation ran from the date of that agreement. Citations: [1987] 9 ConLR 139 … Continue reading Amantilla Ltd v Telefusion plc: 1987
Disapplication of Without Prejudice Rules The House was asked whether a letter sent during without prejudice negotiations which acknowledged a debt was admissible to restart the limitation period. An advice centre, acting for the borrower had written, in answer to a claim by the lender for the sum still due after the sale of the … Continue reading Bradford and Bingley Plc v Rashid: HL 12 Jul 2006
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
Knowledge of the cause of action was sufficiently established by the seeking of professional advice, to set the limitation period running. The act of making the request indicated a sufficient awareness. Citations: Independent 12-Oct-1995 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 14A(5) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.90557
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
Corporate insolvency proceedings based on a statutory demand for monies due under a previous judgment are an ‘action on a judgment’ within s 24 rather than a method of enforcing or executing the judgment. They are barred by s 24 if brought more than six years after the judgment was obtained. S 24(1) of the … Continue reading Re A Debtor: 1977
The substitution of a successor party to a claim does not constitute a new claim for limitation purposes. Millett LJ considered the objects of the 1980 Act: ‘The 1980 Act was enacted in order to implement the recommendations of the Twenty-First Report of the Law Reform Committee (Final Report on Limitation of Actions) (Cmnd 6923) … Continue reading Yorkshire Regional Health Authority v Fairclough Building Ltd and Another: CA 16 Nov 1995
Members of Lloyd’s who faced re-insurance underwriting liabilities alleged negligence on the part of the active underwriter, their members’ agents and their syndicates’ managing agents. Limitation defences were raised. Held: Mere knowledge of the damage of which complaint is later made, is not sufficient to start time running. Hoffmann LJ emphasised the statutory words ‘attributable … Continue reading Hallam-Eames and Others v Merrett Syndicates Ltd and Others: CA 25 Jan 1995
The company sought to strike out a winding up petition presented by the respondents, saying a winding up petition was by way of an action, and was barred by statute after six years. Held: A winding up petition was not an action within the section and was not time barred after 6 years. Citations: LTL … Continue reading Ridgeway Motors (Isleworth) Ltd v Altis: ChD 21 May 2004
A claimant was not fixed with knowledge of the source of his injury by being referred for medical opinion. He could not be expected to understand the source of this injury without expert assistance, and time did not run until such assistance was obtained. Judges: Henry LJ Citations: Times 28-May-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1486, [1999] … Continue reading Ali v Courtaulds Textiles Ltd: CA 26 May 1999
There was a heated dispute between neighbours, culminating in some generous or perhaps over-generous pruning by the claimant of the defendant’s trees and shrubs on the boundaries. The defendants reported the matter to the police. Both Mr and Mrs Dalziel made oral complaints to the officer who attended upon them. He later returned and Mr … Continue reading Buckley v Dalziel: QBD 3 May 2007
The appellant had taken out a licence to drill for oil on its land. To maximise its return it drilled at a deep level out under the claimant’s land. It now appealed against a finding that this was a trespass, and that it should pay damages on a licence basis. Held: The drilling was a … Continue reading Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd and Another v Bocardo Sa: CA 15 Jun 2009
An administrator de son tort, who was also a beneficiary, held the estate property on trust, and so could not establish adverse possession against the estate during the period of trusteeship. He held a sufficient interest in the assets already. A delay in the application for the grant did not apply where time had not … Continue reading Earnshaw and Others v Hartley: CA 31 Mar 1999
The plaintiff’s car was struck by a company car driven by the defendant in the course of her employment and she sought damages. Her action, against the employer, was struck out as late under the 1980 Act. She then commenced an action against the driver defendant. Held: The plaintiff was allowed to seek the exercise … Continue reading Shapland v Palmer: CA 23 Mar 1999
A beneficiary under an intestacy, who tried to position himself as owner of assets in the estate, became a constructive trustee of those assets, with or without letters of administration, and accordingly the claim for the return of the land was not time-barred. ‘Parliament, wittingly or unwittingly has drawn a distinction between personal representatives and … Continue reading James v Williams: CA 8 Mar 1999
The Truro Crown Court had allowed Mr Adair’s appeal against his conviction for obstructing a highway. The prosecutor appealed. Held: It had to be decided whether a particular road had become by presumed dedication a public highway. The use relied on constituted an offence under section 34(1) of the 1988 Act. A claim of long … Continue reading Robinson v Adair: QBD 2 Mar 1995
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
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
Henderson LJ referred to the judgment of Neuberger LJ in Sephton in which he discussed the need for there to be an assumption that the claimant desires to know that there has been a fraud. Henderson LJ observed: ‘Another way to make the same point . . might be that the ‘assumption’ referred to by … Continue reading Gresport Finance Ltd v Battaglia: CA 23 Mar 2018
Partners Liable for Dishonest Act of Solicitor A solicitor had been alleged to have acted dishonestly, having assisted in a fraudulent breach of trust by drafting certain documents. Contributions to the damages were sought from his partners. Held: The acts complained of were so close to the activities which a solicitor would normally undertake, that … Continue reading Dubai Aluminium Company Limited v Salaam and Others: HL 5 Dec 2002
Bank not liable for fraud of customer The appellant sought to make the bank liable for a fraud committed by the Bank’s customer, the appellant saying that the Bank knew or ought to have known of the fraud. The court was asked whether a party liable only as a dishonest assistant was a trustee, and … Continue reading Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria: SC 19 Feb 2014
A limited company is not a trustee of its funds, but their beneficial owner. However, the fiduciary character of the duties of its directors mean that they are treated as if they were trustees of those funds of the company which are in their hands or under their control, and if they misapply them they … Continue reading Re Lands Allotment Company: CA 1894
A positive averment by defendant short of a claim for relief did not constitute a ‘claim’ under the section, and the judge had jurisdiction to allow a later amendment claiming relief as an original counterclaim. It was not barred either under RSC 20 (5) Citations: Gazette 14-Oct-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1443, [1999] 1 WLR 231 … Continue reading JFS (UK) Limited Tilghman Wheelabrator Limited v Dwr Cymru Cyf: CA 18 Sep 1998
The claimants appealed from rejection of their claims for losses saying that such losses had been caused by their solicitors in failing properly to identify the tenant and the relevant lease when issuing notices to quit. The solicitors argued that the losses occurred when the defective notices were served, and by that date, the claims … Continue reading Gordon and Others (Trustees of The Inter Vivos Trust) v Campbell Riddell Breeze Paterson Llp: SC 15 Nov 2017
Where an action had been begun on basis of allegations of negligence and breach of trust, new allegations of fraud where quite separate new causes of claim, and went beyond amendments and were disallowed outside the relevant limitation period. Sections 23 and 36 and the absence of express statutory mention in the 1980 Act of … Continue reading Paragon Finance Plc (Formerly Known As National Home Loans Corporation Plc v D B Thakerar and Co (a Firm); Ranga and Co (a Firm) and Sterling Financial Services Limited: CA 21 Jul 1998
The commissioners sought to claim title to a foreshore by adverse possession. The claimant asserted that he had acquired title in his capacity of Lord Marcher of Magor which had owned the bed of the estuary since the Norman Conquest, and that the Crown could not acquire title by adverse possession, by a wrong against … Continue reading Roberts v Crown Estate Commissioners: CA 20 Feb 2008
Citations: [2003] EWCA Civ 695 Links: Bailii Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 33(3)(a) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Coad v Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Health Authority CA 17-Jul-1996 A nurse suffered a back injury in 1983 in the course of her employment. She left the employment of the health authority in either 1990 … Continue reading Skerratt v Linfax Ltd (T/A Go Karting for Fun): CA 6 May 2003
Asutlii (High Court of Australia) Limitation of Actions – Appellant alleged respondent had raped and assaulted her in 1971 – Appellant alleged that she suffered post-traumatic stress disorder of delayed onset in 2000 and became aware of the connection between this disorder and the rapes and assaults in the same year – Proceedings were commenced … Continue reading Stingel v Clark: 20 Jul 2006
The claimant had delivered his claim form to the court, but it was not processed until after the limitation period had expired. The defendant appealed a finding that the claimant had brought the cliam within the necessary time. Held: The claim was brought within the necessary time limit. ‘the courts have given claimants the full … Continue reading St. Helens Metropolitan Borough Council v Barnes: CA 25 Oct 2006
The court considered an extension of the time for claiming damages for personal injuries after the claimants said they had been sexually abused as children in the care of the defendants. Held: The test to be applied under section 14(2) was ‘partly subjective’and ‘section 14(2) was designed principally to provide for cases of late diagnosis … Continue reading KR and others v Bryn Alyn Community (Holdings) Ltd and Another: CA 10 Jun 2003
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
The plaintiff suffered injury walking a gangway onto a moored ship. Her solicitors failed to identify the owner of the ship, misspelling the name and failing to search in the General Register of Shipping and Seamen. The eventual claim was made outside the basic limitation period. Was the plaintiff fixed with knowledge under section 14(3)(b)? … Continue reading Henderson v Temple Pier Company Limited: CA 23 Apr 1998
Where a first writ issued within the primary limitation period is itself ineffective (although not a nullity) through having been issued variously without consent against a company in liquidation. Held: The Walkley principle does not apply to defeat in limine a second action, notwithstanding that in each of those cases the defect was recognised to … Continue reading Mcevoy v AA Welding and Fabrication Ltd: CA 15 Dec 1997
The plaintiff sought damages for deafness following exposure to excessive noise during his employment with the first and second defendants some 20 to 35 years previously. He issued his writ six years after the date of knowledge under LA section 14 and therefore three years after expiry of the limitation period. The judge had declined … Continue reading Price v United Engineering Steels Limited; J J Habershon and Sons Limited: CA 12 Dec 1997
The claimant had for many years operated a mobile cafe from a layby on land owned by the respondents. He had claimed title to it by adverse possession. He appealed against rejection of the claim, the court having found that his occupation had not been continuous. Held: The evidence was clear and saitisfactory that he … Continue reading Devanney v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 13 Dec 2012
Where there was still a possibility of a claim for restitution, a decision to strike out the action on the basis that there was no extant cause of action, was wrong. Citations: Times 15-May-1997 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 35(5) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Pontin v Wood CA 1962 The writ had been … Continue reading Brennan v Brighton Borough Council: CA 7 May 1997
The plaintiffs appealed from an order striking out their claim for want of prosecution. The defendant’s property had been sold by the mortgagees, and the plaintiffs as assignees of their debt sought to recover the balance outstanding from the defendants. The defendant had been in default since 1984. The defendants said that the claim was … Continue reading Hopkinson and Others and Birmingham Mid-Shires Building Society v Tupper: CA 30 Jan 1997
Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 727, [2008] 1 All ER 1124 Links: Bailii Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation, Torts – Other Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.258299
A contribution to a damages award was sought. The two year period under section 10 had expired between the anniversary of the date on which an agreement to settle the victim’s claim had been made and the anniversary of the consent order which had given effect to the agreement. The court had to decide whether … Continue reading Knight v Rochdale Healthcare NHS Trust, the National Health Service Litigation Authority, The Secretary of State for Health: QBD 23 Jul 2003
The defendant resisted the plaintiff’s claim for personal injuries as out of time. His explanation for not pursuing inquiries with his solicitor was that he was an over-stayer who feared deportation. Held: Having good reason to make such inquiries, it was reasonable for him to do so despite his immigration status. Citations: [1997] 8 Med … Continue reading Coban v Aynur Allen F Barnes and Son (a Firm): CA 8 Oct 1996
Limitation runs only from date of demand on loan with no fixed repayment date. Citations: Times 09-May-1996 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 6(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.78486
The statutory time limit under the Limitation Act applied only to the right to take substantive proceedings and had nothing whatever to do with the procedural machinery for enforcing a judgment when one was obtained. The Act of 1875 brought about a fundamental change. The old absolute time bar on execution after 20 years, subsequently … Continue reading Lowsley and Another v Forbes: CA 21 Mar 1996
The court was asked as to the extent and nature of knowledge required to start time running against a plaintiff in a negligence case.Purchas LJ said: ‘It is to be noted that a firm belief held by the plaintiff that his injury was attributable to act or omission of the defendant, but in respect of … Continue reading Nash v Eli Lilley and Co: CA 1993
Appeals against a judge’s use of his judicial discretion exercised on the extension of time for commencement of proceedings will succeed only with difficulty. Citations: Times 19-May-1994, [1995] PIQR 135 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 33(1)(a) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Chagos Islanders v Attorney-General and Another CA 22-Jul-2004 The claimants sought leave … Continue reading Yates v Thakeham Tiles Ltd: CA 19 May 1994
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 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 applicants owned a substantial property near an airbase. They complained that changes in the patterns of flying by the respondents were a nuisance and sought damages. Walcot Hall was subjected to very high noise levels from military aircraft. The particular noise is loud and characterised by a very rapid onset with a corresponding startle … Continue reading Dennis and Dennis v Ministry of Defence: QBD 16 Apr 2003
The deceased had begun an action on becoming ill after exposure to asbestos by the defendant. He withdrew his action after receiving expert evidence that his illness was unrelated. A post-mortem examination showed this evidence to be mistaken. His widow sought to pursue an action, but it was claimed that this was out of time. … Continue reading Barry Young (Deceased) v Western Power Distribution (South West) Plc: CA 18 Jul 2003
The claimant applied for leave to bring an action for race discrimination nine years after the acts complained of. Leave was granted. The respondent said the tribunal should have heard the complaint first before deciding to extend time. Held: The discretion given was to act as the tribunal thought just and equitable. There was no … Continue reading Afolabi v Southwark London Borough Council: CA 24 Jan 2003
What makes a claim a ‘new claim’ as defined in section 35(2) of the Limitation Act 1980 is not the newness of the case according to the type or quantum of the remedy claimed, but the newness of the cause of action that it involves. A cause of action is a set of facts that … Continue reading Aldi Stores Ltd v Holmes Buildings Plc: CA 1 Dec 2003
Applicable time limit for the bringing of claims arising out of a public procurement process which is not governed by the Public Contracts (and similar) Regulations. It raises the stark contrast between the 3-month time limit required for an application for judicial review, and the 6-year limit for a claim for breach of statutory duty … Continue reading The Secretary of State for Transport v Arriva Rail East Midlands Ltd (‘Arriva’): CA 18 Dec 2019
The bankrupt, while solvent had acquired a property which was first put in his own sole name, but then transferred to his wife outwardly ‘in consideration of love and affection’. Several years later, on the bankruptcy, the trustee sought to have the transaction set aside. The bankrupt, now discharged, said that in fact the original … Continue reading Stonham v Ramrattan and Another: CA 16 Feb 2011
LRA Adverse possession – whether user permissive – whether factual possession and intention to possess established – whether title was acknowledged under ss 29 and 30 of the Limitation Act 1980 – effect of squatter being secure tenant and subsequently exercising right to buy – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v Graham [2003] 1 AC … Continue reading Aristotelis Kleanthous, Sofoulla Kleanthous v The London Borough of Barnet (Adverse Possession): LRA 8 Dec 2006
LRA Adverse Possession – Registration with possessory freehold title – Limitation of action – Alteration of the register – Meaning of alteration and rectification – Land Registration Act 2002 s 9(1)(c),(5), s 11(7), s 65, s 131, Sch 4 paras 1, 5, and 6 – Limitation Act 1980 s 15(1), (6), s 17, Sch.1, paras … Continue reading Thompson and Thompson v Hatherton Marina Limited: LRA 11 May 2007
Land Registration Act 1925 section 75 – Limitation Act 1980 section 15 and Sch 1 Para 8(4) – Adverse possession – Agreement – Lease or Licence – Whether consent given by paper owner – Whether squatter had intention to possess – Adverse possession not made out – Application dismissed Citations: [2006] EWLandRA 2004 – 1242 … Continue reading J C Decaux Ltd v Kwik Save Stores Ltd (Adverse Possession): LRA 23 Jun 2006
The claimant appealed against an order that his claim in defamation had failed for limitation, the judge having held that time ran from publication even though the claimant did not know the identity of the author. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The court had to take two separate decisions. First had the cause of action … Continue reading Edwards v Golding and others: CA 3 Apr 2007
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 claimants appealed against a decision of the Adjudicator that they had not acquired a piece of their neighbour’s land by adverse possession, on the basis that their use had been by virtue of an oral licence. The judge had found the occupation to be insufficient to demnstrate exclusion of others from the land. Held: … Continue reading Wilson and Another v Grainger: ChD 4 Dec 2009
The defendant entered into a mortgage loan. The property was repossessed and he faced an action for recovery of the shortfall. It was argued that the claim was out of time after six years. The court held that the debt remained a specialty debt and the twelve year period applied, but nevertheless, the actual claimant … Continue reading Global Financial Recoveries Ltd v Jones: ChD 13 Jan 2000
The claimants wished to claim damages arising from the participation by the defendants in an unlawful cartel. The Court of Appeal had said that the claim was out of time, and that the claimants would have to seek an extension of time to bring their claim. Held: The Tribunal acted on the basis that it … Continue reading BCL Old Co Ltd and Others Basf Se (Formerly Basf Ag) and Others: CAT 19 Nov 2009
The dispute followed the grounding of a tanker the Ocean Victory. The ship was working outside of a safe port requirement in the charterparty agreement. The contract required the purchase of insurance against maritime war and protection and indemnity risks. The grounding occurred during a combination of severe weather events. Each of the two elements … Continue reading Gard Marine and Energy Ltd and Another v China National Chartering Company Ltd and Another: SC 10 May 2017
Whether the cause of action for the outstanding sums accrued when D first defaulted in his payments or only when D failed to comply with the default notice stipulated by CCA s.87(1) and required by clause 8f of the Agreement. D appealed from a finding against him. Held: The appeal failed. ‘The effect of the … Continue reading Doyle v PRA Group (UK) Ltd: CA 23 Jan 2019
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
The claimant had been seriously injured in an accident during a swimming lesson. She sought to claim against the local authority, and now appealed against a finding that it was not responsible, having contracted out the provision of swimming lessons. She said that the duty of care was non-delegable. Held: Her appeal succeeded. For a … Continue reading Woodland v Essex County Council: SC 23 Oct 2013
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The parents, devout Roman Catholics, resisted. Held: The parents’ views were subject to the overriding … Continue reading In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation): CA 22 Sep 2000
The claimant had been abused as a child by foster parents with whom she had been placed by the respondent authority. The court was now asked, the Council not having been negligent, were they in any event liable having a non-delegable duty of care with accompanying vicarious liability? Held: The appeal succeeded (Lord Hughes dissenting). … Continue reading Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council: SC 18 Oct 2017
The court preferred the more objective approach as to looking at when a plaintiff was to be fixed with knowledge of his injury: ‘If the purpose of section 14(3) is to create deemed or constructive knowledge in circumstances where there is no actual knowledge, it is highly improbable that Parliament intended that the application of … Continue reading Parry v Clwyd Health Authority: QBD 1996
A court can turn down, and refuse to hear or accept claims, which were similar to a previous, statute barred, deceit claim. Citations: Times 10-May-1994 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 2 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal from – Goose v Wilson Sandford and Co and Mainon CA 13-Feb-1998 A judge was properly criticised for … Continue reading Goose v Wilson Sandford and Co (A Firm) and Another: ChD 10 May 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
The creditor appealed the decision to set aside a statutory demand as statute barred. Held: The appeal was dismissed. Bankruptcy proceedings based on a statutory demand for moneys due under a previous default judgment constituted ‘an action upon a judgment’ within s24(1). Insolvency proceedings constituted a fresh action or proceeding newly brought, of the kind … Continue reading Re a Debtor: ChD 1997
The parties were each sureties for a debt to their bank from their company. The bank recovered the company’s debt from one surety, who in turn sought a contribution of half from the other. The respondent asserted that the claim was statute barred, because in this case it was a claim under a guarantee for … Continue reading Hampton v Minns: ChD 17 May 2001
The court considered whether a solicitor acting for a potential plaintiff was considered to be an expert for the purposes of the section. Held: Purchas LJ said: ‘Of course as advice from a solicitor as to the legal consequences of the act or omission is not relevant his contribution can only consist of factual information. … Continue reading Nash v Eli Lilly and Co: CA 1993
