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 to the claimants.
Held: ‘The knowledge of a loss adjuster investigating and advising on a claim on behalf of insurers for the purpose of pursuing a subrogated claim by those insurers, is to be treated as the knowledge of the insurers for the purposes of s.14A(5).’
Judges:
Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Chadwick And Mr Justice Cresswell
Citations:
[2003] EWCA Civ 1177, Times 10-Sep-2003
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Nash v Eli Lilley and Co CA 1993
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 . .
Cited – Spargo v North Essex District Health Authority CA 13-Mar-1997
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Insurance, Limitation
Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.185553
