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.
[2004] EWCA Civ 920
Bailii
Limitation Act 1980 33
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedKR and others v Bryn Alyn Community (Holdings) Ltd and Another CA 12-Feb-2003
kr_bryn2CA2003
The respondent appealed decisions by the court to allow claims for personal injury out of time. The claims involved cases of sexual abuse inflicted by its employees going back over many years.
Held: The judge had misapplied the test laid down . .
CitedThompson v Brown Construction (Ebbw Vale) Ltd HL 1981
The plaintiff’s solicitors, out of negligence, failed to issue a writ until one month after the limitation period had expired. The application to extend the period was rejected at first instance since he had an unanswerable claim against his . .
CitedNash v Eli Lilly and Co CA 1993
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 . .
CitedCoad v Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Health Authority CA 17-Jul-1996
coad_cornwallCA1996
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 or 1991. The judge had accepted her evidence that she did not know that she had a right of action against her . .
CitedForbes v Wandsworth Health Authority CA 21-Mar-1996
forbes_wandsworthCA1996
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 . .
CitedMargolis v Imperial Tobacco Limited, Gallaher Limited, Hergall (In Liquidation) CA 6-Apr-2000
The court of appeal considered when it might interfere with the exercise of a judge’s discretion to extend the limitation period.
Held: The court ‘[will] not interfere with the judge’s discretion unless it was exercised upon wrong principles, . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 January 2021; Ref: scu.199583