The claimant sought damages from his barrister saying that he should have introduced evidence of his good character during the trial. The defendant appealed against the order permitting extension of the limitation period.
Held: The court had not allowed the defendant the difficulty he would face in establishing the condition of the claimants mental health at the trial to defend te claim for damages. Nor would it be possible to reconstruct after such a long period the details of the trial so as to assess what would have happened if the defendant had done as it was suggested he should have. The defendant had been prejudiced by the delay which was long and largely unexplained.
 EWHC 2982 (QB)
Cited – Donovan v Gwentoys Ltd HL 1990
The plaintiff, then a 16 year old girl slipped and fell whilst employed at the defendant’s factory. The limitation period expired on her 21st birthday. She commenced proceedings five and a half months after that date. The judge extended time under . .
Cited – Steedman, Clohosy, Smith, Kiernan, Newman, Creevy, Anderson v The British Broadcasting Corporation CA 23-Oct-2001
The claimants had issued defamation proceedings. The defendant said they were out of time, having begun the action more than one year after the alleged publication, but accepted that they had not been prejudiced in their defence. The court refused . .
Cited – Hartley v Birmingham City District Council CA 1992
The writ was issued one day late; there had been early notification of the claim; and the defendant’s ability to defend the case was unaffected. The plaintiff asked the court to exercide its discretion to allow the claim t proceed.
Held: The . .
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.
Professional Negligence, Limitation
Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.263259