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
The plaintiff issued proceedings against her father and mother, alleging physical and sexual abuse against her father and want of parental care against her mother. The claim against the father was in trespass, but that against her mother was in negligence. Held: The claim against the father was governed by the six years limitation period, … Continue reading Seymour v Williams: CA 1995
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
Limitation period for claims for rent against guarantor under seal is six years. Citations: Times 22-Nov-1995 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 19 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.88854
Limitation periods are more easily set aside in defamation cases. The court has a wide discretion. Citations: Times 15-Nov-1995 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 32A Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.84515
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 plaintiff loaned money on the basis of a negligent survey by the defendant. The borrower subsequently defaulted, and the lender issued a writ. The defendant said that the claim was time barred. Held: The court allowed the plaintiff’s appeal. A cause of action against surveyor arose only when the loss was sustained and crystalised, … Continue reading First National Comercial Bank plc v Humberts: CA 27 Jan 1995
Allowing an action to continue after the limitation period was not same as a striking out. Citations: Times 16-Feb-1995 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 33 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.78240
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 normal limitation period applies to directors’ disqualification applications. Citations: Gazette 26-Feb-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 931, Times 17-Feb-1997 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 39 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Halstead v Council of City of Manchester CA 23-Oct-1997 Land had been compulsorily purchased, and the compensation agreed, but after long delays in payment, … Continue reading Moore and Another v Gadd and Another: CA 5 Feb 1997
Limitation rules were not to be dis-applied merely because the defendant was insured. Citations: Gazette 15-Jan-1997, Times 15-Nov-1996 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.82710
The plaintiffs had discovered that the defendant surveyors had negligently failed to observe that there was dry rot but did not start proceedings until other negligence was discovered more than six years later. Held: Although the negligent survey had led to two heads of loss there was only one cause of action. Since the plaintiffs … Continue reading Hamlin and Another v Edwin Evans (A Firm): CA 15 Jul 1996
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
Judges: Hart J Citations: [2005] EWHC 1382 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 14A Jurisdiction: England and Wales Professional Negligence, Limitation Updated: 27 September 2022; Ref: scu.228236
(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
Appeal against finding that a local authority was not responsible for the sexual abuse of the appellant whilst with foster carers as a child. Held: As to whether the duty as non-delegable, such a duty must relate to a function which the local authority had assumed a duty to perform. Fostering was not a function … Continue reading NA v Nottinghamshire County Council: CA 12 Nov 2015
‘Does the non-payment of a court fee mean that time continues to run for limitation purposes in respect of a new claim within existing proceedings? In my view it does not. If a new claim which is not otherwise abusive is made by amendment within the limitation period, it will not later become time-barred because … Continue reading Butters and Another v Hayes: CA 25 Feb 2021
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
The defendant had been convicted and sentenced for the attempted rape of the claimant. He had subsequently won a substantial sum on the lottery, and she now sought damages. He replied that the action was statute barred being now 16 years old. The claimant said the decision to deny her claim had interfered with her … Continue reading A v Hoare: QBD 14 Oct 2005
The court considered the effect on limitation of a person taking steps to disguise the identity of a potential defendant. Held: Where the employer’s identity had been ‘hidden’ under mere reference to a corporate group, the date of knowledge only came when the employee learned his employer’s actual name. Citations: [1980] 1 WLR 968 Statutes: … Continue reading Simpson v Norwest Holst Southern Ltd: CA 1980
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
The claimant sought damages in negligence against solicitors who had advised the executors in an estate of which he was a beneficiary. He now sought to amend his claim to make a claim in his personal and in derivative capacities. Sums had been paid out of the estate which had defeated the inheritance rights of … Continue reading Roberts v Gill and Co and Another: CA 15 Jul 2008
The court considered the meaning of ‘war’ in the context of an insurance contract: ‘The issue is not whether the events in Lebanon were recognised in the United Kingdom as amounting to a civil war in the sense in which the term is used in Public International Law with the corollary that this country would, … Continue reading Spinneys (1948) Ltd v Royal Insurance Co Ltd: 1980
The shipping company was insured against loss of business following Acts of war. It sought to claim after the attack on America in September 2001. Held: The policy had a limitation which applied ‘in the annual aggregate and in all’ which therefore prevented separate sums in respect of each ship exceeding this sum in total. … Continue reading If P and C Insurance Limited (Publ.) v Silversea Cruises Limited, Silver Cloud Shipping Company Sa, Silver Wind Shipping Company Sa, Silversea New Build One Limited, Silversea New Build Two Limited&Quot;the Silver Cloud&Quot;: CA 5 Jul 2004
Parties had entered into a shareholders’ agreement as to voting arrengemets within a company. Thay disputed whether votes had been used in reach of that agreement, particularly as to the issue of new shares and their allotment, but the court now considered whether the claim was out of time. That issue depended upon whether a … Continue reading Halton International Inc (Holding) and Another v Guernroy Ltd: ChD 9 Sep 2005
A lease had been granted with a break clause, which the tenant exercised. The Landlord said it had not complied with its obligations and was not free to exercise that clause. The clause had included the word ‘landlord’ where it should have read ‘tenant’. Held: The tenant’s appeal failed. The judge was correct to allow … Continue reading Littman and Another v Aspen Oil (Broking) Ltd: CA 19 Dec 2005
The claimant appealed against a refusal of judicial review of a decision of the Lands Tribunal. Held: A decision of the Lands Tribunal could only be judicially reviewed in exceptional cases where there was either a jurisdictional error or a procedural irregularity. The application had been correctly refused. ‘The question of whether certain work is … Continue reading Sinclair Gardens Investments (Kensington) Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v The Lands Tribunal: CA 8 Nov 2005
The claimants sought to amend their particulars of claim to add a request for declarations with regard to a bill of lading and contract for carriage. Held: The application to amend was made more than six years after the cause of action accrued. It was in its nature a new claim. The additional possibility that … Continue reading P and O Nedloyd BV v Arab Metals Co and Others (‘The UB Tiger’): QBD 22 Jun 2005
Former members of the armed forces and others claimed damages for personal injuries, claiming that they had been obliged to expose themselves to the effects of atomic bomb explosions in the 1950s. The defendant argued that the claims were now out of time. Held: New scientific evidence had become available to support the claim, and … Continue reading AB and Others v Ministry of Defence: QBD 5 Jun 2009
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
Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 482 Links: Bailii Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 3391) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation, Personal Injury Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.224904
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 claimants began an action in January 2003 to seek to set aside the appointment of an administrator from December 1991, and to have set aside transfers of property made within the estate. Held: The limitation period against a personal representative began to run only after one year, the executor’s year, after the grant. No … Continue reading Green and others v Gaul and Another; In re Loftus deceased: ChD 18 Mar 2005
The defendant appealed an order adding two new claimants. Held: Cases decided under the old RSC were not apposite for matters covered by the new Civil Procedure Rules. The court was not bound by the Sardinia Sulcis rules: ‘The Sardinia Sulcis should be allowed to sink back to the ocean bottom. It would muddy the … Continue reading Morgan Est (Scotland) Ltd v Hanson Concrete Products Ltd: CA 17 Feb 2005
The company appelaed a refusal of the judge to strike out a winding up petition. They said the petition was based upon a judgment which was now time barred. The petitioner replied that such a petition was not an action under the section. Held: Although a winding up petition is, in a general sense, a … Continue reading Ridgeway Motors (Isleworth) Ltd v Alts Ltd: CA 10 Feb 2005
The company sought repayment of excess advance corporation tax payments made under a mistake of law. The question was the extent of the effect of the ruling in Klienwort Benson, in particular whether it covered sums paid as taxation, and how the law of limitation was to be allowed for. Held: Money paid under a … Continue reading Inland Revenue and Another v Deutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc: CA 4 Feb 2005
The claimant’s husband died when his car skidded on hoar frost. She claimed the respondent was liable under the Act and at common law for failing to keep it safe. Held: The respondent had not assumed a general responsibility to all road users to ensure that all or any trunk roads would be salted in … Continue reading Jane Marianne Sandhar, John Stuart Murray v Department of Transport, Environment and the Regions: CA 5 Nov 2004
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
The Society had taken possession of a property in 1989. It located the defendants many years later and sought payment of the excess after deduction of the proceeds of sale, and for interest. The borrowers claimed the debt was expired by limitation under s20. The Society said that the debt was a judgment debt which … Continue reading West Bromwich Building Society v Wilkinson: HL 30 Jun 2005
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
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
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
Burden is on the plaintiff to show when time began in personal injuries action. Citations: Times 05-Jul-1995 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 11 Limitation Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79675
Francis Bacon sold his paintings through the defendant agents for many years. The original contractual arrangement grew into a fiduciary one. The claimants asserted that the defendants were in breach of that fiduciary duty, the defendants asserted that the relationship remained contractual, and that it was now time barred. Held: There may be a true … Continue reading Clarke (Executor of the Will of Francis Bacon, Deceased) v Marlborough Fine Art (London) Ltd and Another: ChD 5 Jul 2001
When a party requested a court to set aside the limitation period, he was under a high duty to disclose all relevant details. Where it turned out later that he had failed to disclose relevant aspects of his medical history, it was perfectly open to the court to revisit the original order and to re-instate … Continue reading Long v Tolchard and Sons Ltd: CA 5 Jan 2000
A workman contracted pneomoconiosis and knew all the relevant facts but was advised by the local secretary of his trade union that he could not sue. His later claim was met by a defence of limtation. Held: The action was time barred. Citations: 1980 SC (HL) 46 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – … Continue reading McIntyre v Armitage Shanks Ltd: HL 1980
The significance of the distinction between occupation and rights was that although the deserted wife was in actual occupation of the former matrimonial home, the quality of her rights was not such as to be capable of amounting to an overriding interest. A purchaser of land and in particular a reversion to a lease, will … Continue reading National Provincial Bank Limited v Ainsworth: HL 1965
The claimant was detained in a secure Mental Hospital. He complained at the seclusions policy applied by the hospital, saying that it departed from the Guidance issued for such policies by the Secretary of State under the Act. Held: The House allowed the Hospital’s appeal. The policy was lawful. Seclusion was to be seen as … Continue reading Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz: HL 13 Oct 2005
Citations: [2018] EWHC 729 (TCC), [2018] WLR(D) 202 Links: Bailii Statutes: Liability (Contribution) Act 1978, Limitation Act 1980 10(1) 10(3) 10(4) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620121
Enforcement by judgment on co-ordinate jurisdiction judgment is discretionary: ‘ . . having regard to the decision in Re A Debtor [1977] Ch 310 that s 24(1) of the 1980 Act bars after six years rights of action including proceedings in the form of bankruptcy proceedings, based on an earlier judgment.’ Judges: Patten J Citations: … Continue reading E D and F Man (Sugar) Ltd v Haryanto: ChD 24 Nov 1995
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
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005
The court will not add a person as a defendant to an existing action if the claim was already statute-barred and he wished to rely on that defence, and if the court allows such addition ex parte it will not, on objection allow the addition to stand. Where a defendant is added under Ord.15 r.6 … Continue reading Liff v Peasley: CA 1980
The trustee in bankruptcy had taken a charge on the property in 1992 to support the bankruptcy in 1988. He sought to enforce it in 2005. The chargor appealed an order which denied he was protected by limitation. Held: The appeal succeeded. Charges under the 1986 Act were unusual in that they were not preceded … Continue reading Doodes v Gotham, Perry: ChD 17 Nov 2005
Bank not to recover more than its losses The court was asked as to the remedy available to the appellant bank against the respondent, a firm of solicitors, for breach of the solicitors’ custodial duties in respect of money entrusted to them for the purpose of completing a loan which was to be secured by … Continue reading AIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler and Co Solicitors: SC 5 Nov 2014
Appeal against refusal to excuse claim in slander being out of time. The claim was in respect of the claimant being ‘disfellowed’ by the Society. Held: The claim form was in fact issued one day within the period. Appeal allowed. Judges: Sir Geoffrey Charles Vos Ch, Gloster, Sharp LJJ Citations: [2017] EWCA Civ 136 Links: … Continue reading Otuo v Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Britain: CA 9 Mar 2017
The court was asked as to the principles applicable to the court’s discretion, when making an order for the restoration to the register of a dissolved company, to order that the running of time for the bringing of claims by the company for the purposes of the Limitation Act 1980 should be suspended during all … Continue reading County Leasing Asset Management Ltd and Others v Hawkes: CA 4 Dec 2015
The court was asked whether the judge was right to grant summary judgment striking down the first and third appellants’ negligence claims against their solicitors on the grounds that they were issued more than 3 years after they acquired ‘the knowledge required for bringing an action for damages in respect of the relevant damage’ within … Continue reading Blakemores Ldp v Scott and Another: CA 7 Oct 2015
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
Claim included in statement of case covering multiple references filed within time – notice of reference filed after expiry of limitation period – whether claim referred to Tribunal within time – s.1, Land Compensation Act 1961 – s.9, Limitation Act 1980 – rr.7 and 28, Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) (Lands Chamber) Rules 2010 Martin Rodger, … Continue reading Five Oaks Land Ltd v London Borough of Redbridge (Compensation – Limitation): UTLC 2 Dec 2021
UTLC COMPENSATION – LIMITATION – whether acquiring authority estopped from relying on limitation defence by continuation of negotiations and advance payment made after expiry of limitation period – section 9, Limitation Act 1980 – notice of reference dismissed [2015] UKUT 43 (LC) Bailii Limitation Act 1980 9 England and Wales Land, Limitation Updated: 27 December … Continue reading Khan v Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Executive (T/A Nexus): UTLC 27 Jan 2015
(High Court of Australia) The court considered a possible extension of the law of negligence. Brennan J said: ‘the law should develop novel categories of negligence incrementally and by analogy with established categories. ‘Dean J said: ‘The requirement of proximity is directed to the relationship between the parties in so far as it is relevant … Continue reading Sutherland Shire Council v Heyman: 4 Jul 1985
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 former bankrupt resisted sale of his property by the trustee, saying that enforcement was barred by limitation. He and his wife bought the property in early 1988, and he was made bankrupt in October 1988. He was dischaged from bankruptcy in October 1991. In December 1990 the court answered an application for the sale … Continue reading Gotham v Doodes: CA 25 Jul 2006
The claimants sought to establish title to land by adverse possession. The land was former Crown land. They had occupied the land since 1985. The defendants acquired the land from the Crown in 2000. Held: Part II of the 1980 Act need to be read as a whole. The Crown had up to 30 years … Continue reading Hill and Another v Transport for London: ChD 16 May 2005
The plaintiff’s wife had been killed by a negligently piloted RAF aeroplane. It was argued that, although this was a war injury, the language of section 3(1) did not exclude a claim based on trespass to the person. Held: Lord Greene MR said: ‘It seems to me that in this context the phrase ‘breach of … Continue reading Billings v Reed: CA 1945
The plaintiff’s writ had not been served within the required time, and it had become too late to extend its validity. The plaintiff isued a second writ. The defendant argued limitation. Counsel for the plaintiffs sought to distinguish Walkley on the very narrow ground that there was no question of the first action having being … Continue reading Chappell v Cooper: CA 1980
The applicant challenged the decision of the court that the sperm donor who had fertilised her eggs to create embryos stored by the respondent IVF clinic, could withdraw his consent to their continued storage or use. Held: The judge worked within a strict statutory framework. His task was to calculate the application of that law, … Continue reading Evans v Amicus Healthcare Ltd and others: CA 25 Jun 2004
The tax payer had overpaid Advance Corporation Tax under an error of law. It sought repayment. The revenue contended that the claim was time barred. Held: The claim was in restitution, and the limitation period began to run from the date when the claimants discovered their mistake. The appellants had submitted that section 33 of … Continue reading Deutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc v Inland Revenue and Another: HL 25 Oct 2006
The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. Held: The appeal was dismissed. For Article 9 to be engaged (aside from certain other threshold conditions) the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005
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
A surveyor acting on behalf of the classification society had recommended that after repairs specified by him had been carried out a vessel, the Nicholas H, should be allowed to proceed. It was lost at sea. Held: The marine classification society was not liable in negligence to the owner of a cargo, where it was … Continue reading Marc Rich and Co Ag and Others v Bishop Rock Marine Co Ltd and Others: HL 6 Jul 1995
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
Chilling effect of defamation costs structures Eady J said: ‘The claimant in these proceedings is seeking damages against News Group Newspapers Ltd, as publishers of The News of the World, in respect of articles appearing in the editions of that newspaper dated 3 November 2002 . . He issued his claim form under an assumed … Continue reading Turcu v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 4 May 2005
The plaintiff was driving his car when the defendant turned into his path. Both cars suffered considerable damage but the drivers escaped physical injury. The Plaintiff had a pre-existing chronic fatigue syndrome, which manifested itself from time to time. Held: (Majority) A claim in contract or tort for damages for psychiatric injury is a claim … Continue reading Page v Smith: HL 12 May 1995
Two actions for defamation were brought by the claimant against the defendant. The publication reported in detail allegations made against the claimant of criminal activities including money-laundering on a vast scale. They admitted the defamatory nature of the words, but claimed qualified Reynolds privilege. They said that as responsible journalists they had a duty to … Continue reading Loutchansky v The Times Newspapers Ltd and Others (Nos 2 to 5): CA 5 Dec 2001
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
The defendant tenants appealed an order for them to surrender possession of land which they claimed had been acquired by adverse possession. The buildings, including one which shared a party wall with the building owned by the defendants had been demolished in 1960, and the land enclosed. By former tenants. The land was registered in … Continue reading Tower Hamlets v Barrett and Another: CA 19 Jul 2005
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
The limitation period for an action for wrongful trading under insolvency legislation is six years. Where the statute relied upon enables the court to give relief in monetary or non-monetary form the court should look to see what is actually claimed . .
Substitution of other party after limitation period expiry. The court considered the Law Committee’s recommendations on limitation and noted the intention to allow the addition of defendants out of time where this might validate a claim. . .
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 . .
The Court was asked whether the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘the Commissioner’) owes a duty to her officers, in the conduct of proceedings against her based on their alleged misconduct, to take reasonable care to protect them from . .
An abortion conducted in the tenth week of pregnancy was not condemned. The Commission construed Article 2 to be subject to an implied limitation to allow a balancing act between the interests of mother and unborn child. . .
The claimant sought recovery of a shortfall having sold the defendant’s house for a sum insufficient to clear the mortgage debt, and produced two letters which they claimed acknowledged the debt and restarted the limitation period running. The . .
The claimant had been a passenger in a car driven by his now partner. They had an accident in New South Wales. The car was insured in Australia. He sought leave to sue in England and Wales because Australian law would limit the damages.
Held: . .
The claimant sought damages after suffering injury after the creation of water supplies which were polluted with arsenic. He said that a report had identified the risks. The defendant said that the report was preliminary only and could not found a . .
The claimants had been the registered proprietors of land, they lost it through the adverse possession of former tenants holding over. They claimed that the law had dispossessed them of their lawful rights.
Held: The cumulative effect of the . .
Whether the Chief Master was correct to conclude that it was sufficiently clear that a claim for fraudulent misrepresentation was barred by the provisions of sections 2 and 32(1) of Limitation Act 1980 to justify the grant of summary judgment in . .
A claim for damages for an unwanted pregnancy occurring after a failed sterilisation. The plaintiff claimed damages for her economic losses. She issued only four years after the birth.
Held: The limitation period ran from the date of . .
The plaintiff, injured in an accident, pleaded trespass to the person, which was not a breach of duty within the proviso to the section, in order to achieve the advantages of a six-year limitation period.
Held: Trespass is strictly speaking . .
