Click the case name for better results:

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 LA section 33, holding that he could only consider prejudice suffered by the defendant … Continue reading Donovan v Gwentoys Ltd: HL 1990

Allen v Matthews: CA 13 Mar 2007

The defendants appealed an order refusing title by adverse possession to registered land. They denied that the limitation period had been restarted by their solicitor’s letter acknowledging the title. Held: The letter must be read as a whole. As such it was an admission of title. The requirement that the possession be adverse requires only … Continue reading Allen v Matthews: CA 13 Mar 2007

McCoubrey v Ministry of Defence: CA 24 Jan 2007

The defendant appealed a decision allowing a claim to proceed more than ten years after it had been suffered. The claimant’s hearing had been damaged after an officer threw a thunderflash into his trench on an exercise. Held: The defendant’s appeal was allowed. ‘If a claimant can bring himself within section 11(4)(b), then he can … Continue reading McCoubrey v Ministry of Defence: CA 24 Jan 2007

Horton v Sadler and Another: HL 14 Jun 2006

The claimant had been injured in a road traffic accident for which the defendant was responsible in negligence. The defendant was not insured, and so a claim was to be made against the MIB. The plaintiff issued proceedings just before the expiry of the period, but failed to give first the requisite formal notice to … Continue reading Horton v Sadler and Another: HL 14 Jun 2006

Desnousse v London Borough of Newham and others: CA 17 May 2006

The occupier had been granted a temporary licence by the authority under the homelessness provisions whilst it made its assessment. The assessment concluded that she had become homeless intentionally, and therefore terminated the licence and set out to evict her. She claimed that the authority had to get a court authority before so evicting her. … Continue reading Desnousse v London Borough of Newham and others: CA 17 May 2006

Littman and Another v Aspen Oil (Broking) Ltd: CA 19 Dec 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

Sinclair Gardens Investments (Kensington) Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v The Lands Tribunal: CA 8 Nov 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

Seal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police: HL 4 Jul 2007

The claimant had sought to bring proceedings against the respondent, but as a mental patient subject to the 1983 Act, had been obliged by the section first to obtain consent. The parties disputed whether the failure was a procedural or substantial failing and whether it made the proceedings a nullity. Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. … Continue reading Seal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police: HL 4 Jul 2007

Ridgeway Motors (Isleworth) Ltd v Alts Ltd: CA 10 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

Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office: CA 11 Nov 2004

In 2002 the SFO was investigating allegations that drug companies were selling generic drugs, including penicillin-based antibiotics and warfarin, to the National Health Service at artificially sustained prices. To further the investigation the SFO obtained search warrants and executed them. The company challenged the release of the documents recovered to other government departments. They had … Continue reading Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office: CA 11 Nov 2004

Jane Marianne Sandhar, John Stuart Murray v Department of Transport, Environment and the Regions: CA 5 Nov 2004

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

Morgan EST (Scotland) Ltd v Hanson Concrete Products Ltd: TCC 22 Jul 2004

Citations: [2004] EWHC 1778 (TCC) Links: Bailii Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 35 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appealed to – Morgan Est (Scotland) Ltd v Hanson Concrete Products Ltd CA 17-Feb-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 … Continue reading Morgan EST (Scotland) Ltd v Hanson Concrete Products Ltd: TCC 22 Jul 2004

Inglewood Investments Company Ltd v Baker: CA 8 Nov 2002

The court considered a claim for the adverse possesion of land. Held: Dyson LJ said: ‘to establish a claim of adverse possession for the requisite period of 12 years it is necessary to establish: (1) actual possession; (2) an intention to possess. That has two elements. First a subjective element requiring the person, the trespasser, … Continue reading Inglewood Investments Company Ltd v Baker: CA 8 Nov 2002

Miller and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union: SC 24 Jan 2017

Parliament’s Approval if statute rights affected In a referendum, the people had voted to leave the European Union. That would require a notice to the Union under Article 50 TEU. The Secretary of State appealed against an order requiring Parliamentary approval before issuing the notice, he saying that the notice could be given under the … Continue reading Miller and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union: SC 24 Jan 2017

Williams v Fanshaw Porter and Hazelhurst: CA 18 Feb 2004

The claimant alleged that her solicitors had concealed from her the fact that they had entered a consent order which dismissed her claim for medical negligence. Held: The solicitor had failed to inform the client that her original claim against a doctor had been struck out although he was aware at the time that it … Continue reading Williams v Fanshaw Porter and Hazelhurst: CA 18 Feb 2004

Adams v Bracknell Forest Borough Council: CA 6 May 2003

The claimant sought damages from the defendant for having failed to diagnose his dysexia, resulting in educational failure. The respondent argued a reasonable peson would have sought help earlier. The council appealed a refusal to strike out of the claim. Held: Given undiagnosed dysexia, it was unlikely that he would seek help. The fact that … Continue reading Adams v Bracknell Forest Borough Council: CA 6 May 2003

Ezekiel v Lehrer: CA 30 Jan 2002

The applicant claimed that his solicitor had been negligent with regard to the execution of a mortgage. The solicitor said his claim was time barred. The claimant said the solicitor had hidden the true situation from him, and the solicitor replied that he had merely refused to answer a question put to him, but had … Continue reading Ezekiel v Lehrer: CA 30 Jan 2002

Horne-Roberts (a Child) v Smithkline Beecham plc and Another: CA 18 Dec 2001

The court has a power to order substitution of a party though the limitation period, and even the ‘long stop’ limitation period had expired. The claimant child sought damages after a vaccination. The batch had been attributed to the wrong manufacturer, and the error only came to light outside the limitation period. It was said … Continue reading Horne-Roberts (a Child) v Smithkline Beecham plc and Another: CA 18 Dec 2001

Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria: QBD 8 Apr 2011

The claimant had been defrauded by a customer of the defendant bank. He brought a claim against the bank, saying that they knew or ought to have known of the fraudster’s activities, and were liable. The Bank denied that the UK courts had jurisdiction saying in particular that no claim arose because it would be … Continue reading Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria: QBD 8 Apr 2011

Sniezek v Bundy (Letchworth) Limited: CA 7 Jul 2000

The claimant appealed against a finding that having once already issued a claim, a second claim was out of time, not accepting that she had had the knowledge effective to commence the limitation period. Held: Judge LJ had ‘difficulty in perceiving how in any case where a claimant has sought advice and taken proceedings, it … Continue reading Sniezek v Bundy (Letchworth) Limited: CA 7 Jul 2000

Companhia De Seguros Imperio v Heath (REBX) Ltd and Others: CA 20 Jul 2000

Although a claim for breach of fiduciary duty, as a claim in equity, was not subject to the same limitation periods imposed by the Act as claims in tort or contract, a court exercising an equitable jurisdiction should apply similar periods under the equitable principle of acquiescence. A six year limitation period should be applied … Continue reading Companhia De Seguros Imperio v Heath (REBX) Ltd and Others: CA 20 Jul 2000

James Brocklesby v Armitage and Guest (a Firm): CA 9 Jul 1999

A failure by an adviser to make his position clear when he thought he had been negligent, could constitute a ‘deliberate’ act within section 32 even if the defendant’s actions were not motivated by any intention to deceive the claimant: ‘it is not necessary for the purpose of extending the limitation period pursuant to Section … Continue reading James Brocklesby v Armitage and Guest (a Firm): CA 9 Jul 1999

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 omission to which the injury is attributable; (2) ‘attributable’ in this … Continue reading Spargo v North Essex District Health Authority: CA 13 Mar 1997

Parsons v Warren and Another: CA 31 Jan 2002

Appeal from a judgment that the claim for damages for industrial disease, commenced by the respondent against the appellants had been brought by the respondent within three years of his date of knowledge for the purposes of section 11(4) and section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980, and that, in any event, he would override … Continue reading Parsons v Warren and Another: CA 31 Jan 2002

Legal Services Commission v Rasool: CA 5 Mar 2008

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

Test Claimants In The Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Inland Revenue: SC 23 May 2012

The European Court had found the UK to have unlawfully treated differently payment of franked dividends between subsidiaries of UK companies according to whether all the UK subsidiaries were themselves UK based, thus prejudicing European subsidiaries, breach of EU Treaty guarantees of freedom of establishment and of movement of capital. The court was now asked … Continue reading Test Claimants In The Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Inland Revenue: SC 23 May 2012

Lowsley and Another v Forbes (Trading As I E Design Services): HL 29 Jul 1998

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

Regina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 16 Feb 2001

The claimants challenged the instruction that they must squat whilst undergoing a strip search in prison. A dog search had given cause to supect the presence of explosives in the wing, and the officers understood that such explosives might be hidden anally. Held: The common thread in all the cases has been the search to … Continue reading Regina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 16 Feb 2001

Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd: HL 1979

The plaintiff tried to bring a second action in respect of an industrial injury claim outside the limitation period so as to overcome the likelihood that his first action, although timeous, would be dismissed for want of prosecution. Held: He could not do so. He was not prejudiced by the primary limitation period since he … Continue reading Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd: HL 1979

Thompson 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 solicitors. Held: The discretion under the section arises notwithstanding a plaintiff’s solicitors’ perhaps far greater negligence … Continue reading Thompson v Brown Construction (Ebbw Vale) Ltd: HL 1981

Westminster City Council v Great Portland Estates plc: HL 31 Oct 1984

The House was asked whether the 1971 Act permitted the relevant authorities, by resort to their development plans, to support the retention of traditional industries or was the ambit of the Act such as to permit only ‘land use’ aims to be pursued? The court considered also the relevance of personal considerations in planning matters. … Continue reading Westminster City Council v Great Portland Estates plc: HL 31 Oct 1984

Securum Finance Ltd v Ashton and Another: ChD 18 Jun 1999

The fact that earlier proceedings under a mortgage to recover the debt as a simple contract debt had been dismissed for want of prosecution, did not prevent the mortgagee later proceeding under the mortgage as a specialty debt. Citations: Gazette 30-Jun-1999, Times 18-Jun-1999 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appealed to – … Continue reading Securum Finance Ltd v Ashton and Another: ChD 18 Jun 1999

White v Glass: CA 17 Feb 1989

The plaintiff had sued his club under its name, but it was an unincorporated association, and the action was stricken out as improperly constituted. The first writ issued within the primary limitation period but was ineffective. The defendant claimed limitation under Walkley in defence of the second action. Held: The Walkley principle does not apply … Continue reading White v Glass: CA 17 Feb 1989

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 question under s33(1) is ‘would it be fair and just to allow the … Continue reading Hartley v Birmingham City District Council: CA 1992

Deerness v John R Keeble and Son (Brantham) Ltd: HL 1983

The plaintiff suffered very serious injuries as a passenger in a car, and a writ was issued within the three-year period against the driver and the owner of the car whose insurers made a substantial interim payment. The writ was not served, nor renewed at the end of 12 months, and the limitation period expired … Continue reading Deerness v John R Keeble and Son (Brantham) Ltd: HL 1983

Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association Ltd v Trollope and Colls Ltd: CA 1986

The employers sued the builders and architects alleging defects in the air conditioning system. Later, cracking and displacement of the walls was discovered, caused allegedly by not having sulphate resisting cement, and defects in the wall ties. Allegations were made against the contractors and the architects and also structural engineers. The question then arose whether … Continue reading Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association Ltd v Trollope and Colls Ltd: CA 1986

Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others: HL 8 Feb 1990

Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares. Held: The duties of an auditor are founded in contract and the extent of the duties … Continue reading Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others: HL 8 Feb 1990

Birmingham Midshires Building Society v Infields (A Firm): TCC 20 May 1999

The defendant solicitors had acted for the lenders and borrower in a mortgage transaction. The claimant sought repayment of the entire loan, alleging breach of fiduciary duty, in having preferred the interests of one client over those of another. The betrayal of trust inherent in a breach of duty must be a deliberate act. They … Continue reading Birmingham Midshires Building Society v Infields (A Firm): TCC 20 May 1999

Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005

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

Galilee v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: EAT 22 Nov 2017

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Case management PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Amendment PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Time limits Neither the procedural common law doctrine of ‘relation back’ (now defunct – see Beecham Group plc v Norton Healthcare Ltd [1997] FSR 81, Liff v Peasley [1980] 1 WLR 781 and Ketteman v Hansel Properties Ltd [1987] … Continue reading Galilee v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: EAT 22 Nov 2017

Spectrum Investment Co Ltd v Holmes: ChD 1981

The plaintiff company acquired the registered freehold title of a house in 1957. The house was already demised on a long lease. The leaseholder had sublet to the defendant, who, by continuous non-payment of rent, had, by 1963, acquired a prescriptive title against her. In 1968 the defendant sought registration as proprietor of the leasehold … Continue reading Spectrum Investment Co Ltd v Holmes: ChD 1981

Re Workvale Ltd (In Liquidation): CA 8 Apr 1992

A limited company was correctly restored to the register from dissolution so that its insurers could face an arguable claim. Where a first writ issued within the primary limitation period was ineffective (although not a nullity) through having been issued against a company which had been struck off the register, the Walkley principle does not … Continue reading Re Workvale Ltd (In Liquidation): CA 8 Apr 1992

Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others: SC 20 Mar 2019

The claimant appellant alleged that properties she owned were transferred to the first defendant under undue influence or other unconscionable conduct by the second and third defendants. The claim was dismissed. Three years later she claimed to set that judgment aside having been obtained by fraud. To support the allegation she brought evidence not available … Continue reading Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others: SC 20 Mar 2019

Hedley Byrne and Co Ltd v Heller and Partners Ltd: HL 28 May 1963

Banker’s Liability for Negligent Reference The appellants were advertising agents. They were liable themselves for advertising space taken for a client, and had sought a financial reference from the defendant bankers to the client. The reference was negligent, but the bankers denied any assumption of a duty of care to a third party when purely … Continue reading Hedley Byrne and Co Ltd v Heller and Partners Ltd: HL 28 May 1963

AIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler and Co Solicitors: SC 5 Nov 2014

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

JD, MAK and RK, RK and Another v East Berkshire Community Health, Dewsbury Health Care NHS Trust and Kirklees Metropolitan Council, Oldham NHS Trust and Dr Blumenthal: CA 31 Jul 2003

Damages were sought by parents for psychological harm against health authorities for the wrongful diagnosis of differing forms of child abuse. They appealed dismissal of their awards on the grounds that it was not ‘fair just and reasonable’ to impose such a duty. The appellants sought to distinguish X v Bedfordshire in different ways. Held: … Continue reading JD, MAK and RK, RK and Another v East Berkshire Community Health, Dewsbury Health Care NHS Trust and Kirklees Metropolitan Council, Oldham NHS Trust and Dr Blumenthal: CA 31 Jul 2003

Anns and Others v Merton London Borough Council: HL 12 May 1977

The plaintiff bought her apartment, but discovered later that the foundations were defective. The local authority had supervised the compliance with Building Regulations whilst it was being built, but had failed to spot the fault. The authority appealed a finding that it was liable, arguing that the claims were time barred and that it had … Continue reading Anns and Others v Merton London Borough Council: HL 12 May 1977

The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Amanullah Khan and The Wellcome Trust: ChD 13 Jun 2001

The authority had served notices on the second defendant, requiring him to execute works to bring a property up to a habitable condition. Eventually the authority executed the works themselves, and sought repayment from him of the costs. He resisted enforcement proceedings on the basis that claim was defeated by limitation, and the long delay. … Continue reading The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Amanullah Khan and The Wellcome Trust: ChD 13 Jun 2001

Scottish Equitable Plc v Thompson and Another: CA 6 Feb 2003

The mortgage deed, which was a second mortgage, did not contain any express covenant to repay the principal sum, but only for monthly interest instalments with no element of capital repayment, since the principal was to be paid from an insurance policy. The property was re-possessed and sold, leaving nothing for the second mortgagee after … Continue reading Scottish Equitable Plc v Thompson and Another: CA 6 Feb 2003

Duke of Brunswick v Harmer: QBD 2 Nov 1849

On 19 September 1830 an article was published in the Weekly Dispatch. The limitation period for libel was six years. The article defamed the Duke of Brunswick. Seventeen years after its publication an agent of the Duke purchased a back number containing the article from the Weekly Dispatch’s office. Another copy was obtained from the … Continue reading Duke of Brunswick v Harmer: QBD 2 Nov 1849

Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: HL 28 Jan 2009

Movement retsriction was not Liberty Deprivation The claimants had been present during a demonstration policed by the respondent. They appealed against dismissal of their claims for false imprisonment having been prevented from leaving Oxford Circus for over seven hours. The claimants appealed against rejection of their claims on human rights law. Held: The appeal failed. … Continue reading Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: HL 28 Jan 2009

Russo and Others v Clarke and Another (Easements and Profits A Prendre : Easements of Parking): LRA 3 Feb 2014

LRA Easements of right of way and right to park; Doctrine of Lost Modern Grant, Prescription Act 1832 ss. 2, 4; requirement for a suit or action; deviation of a right of way; section 15(1) of the Limitation Act 1980; permissive use; [2014] EWLandRA 2012 – 0600 Bailii Prescription Act 1832 2 4, Limitation Act … Continue reading Russo and Others v Clarke and Another (Easements and Profits A Prendre : Easements of Parking): LRA 3 Feb 2014

British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others: EAT 26 Mar 1997

The employer appealed against a decision by the tribunal that it had jurisdiction to hear the complaints of sex discrimination. The tribunal had extended the time for the claim on the just and equitable basis. Held: The EAT set out five criteria for answering whether to extend time: ‘(a) the length of and reasons for … Continue reading British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others: EAT 26 Mar 1997

Schwarzschild v Harrods Ltd: QBD 19 Mar 2008

The Claimant alleged against Harrods Limited the tort of conversion in accordance with s.2(2) of the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977. The claim relates to certain personal items (principally jewellery) which she inherited and which for many years remained in a safe deposit box on the Defendant’s premises. Held: On the facts, Eady J … Continue reading Schwarzschild v Harrods Ltd: QBD 19 Mar 2008

Khan v Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Executive (T/A Nexus): UTLC 27 Jan 2015

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

Yorkshire Bank Finance Ltd v Mulhall and Another: CA 24 Oct 2008

The bank had obtained a judgement against the defendant, and took a charging order. Nothing happened for more than twelve years, and the defendant now argued that the order and debt was discharged. Held: The enforcement of the charging order by normal means is not barred by section 20(1), and unlike the position under a … Continue reading Yorkshire Bank Finance Ltd v Mulhall and Another: CA 24 Oct 2008

Reed Elsevier Uk Ltd (T/A Lexisnexis) and Another v Bewry: CA 30 Oct 2014

Appeal from a decision granting the claimant’s application made pursuant to section 32A of the Limitation Act 1980 to disapply the limitation period in his proceedings for libel and dismissing the defendants’ application to strike out the claimant’s claim under CPR rule 3.4(2). Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. The judge had incorrectly assessed the reasons … Continue reading Reed Elsevier Uk Ltd (T/A Lexisnexis) and Another v Bewry: CA 30 Oct 2014

Sutherland Shire Council v Heyman: 4 Jul 1985

(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

BPE Solicitors and Another v Hughes-Holland (In Substitution for Gabriel): SC 22 Mar 2017

The court was asked what damages are recoverable in a case where (i) but for the negligence of a professional adviser his client would not have embarked on some course of action, but (ii) part or all of the loss which he suffered by doing so arose from risks which it was no part of … Continue reading BPE Solicitors and Another v Hughes-Holland (In Substitution for Gabriel): SC 22 Mar 2017

Mercer Ltd and Another v Ballinger and Another: CA 17 Jul 2014

The court was asked as to the circumstances in which the court could allow an amendment of pleadings so as to allow an additional claim where the action would otherwise be outside the limitation period. Dyson L MR, Tomlinson, Briggs LJJ [2014] EWCA Civ 996, [2014] WLR(D) 335 Bailii, WLRD Limitation Act 1980 35 England … Continue reading Mercer Ltd and Another v Ballinger and Another: CA 17 Jul 2014

Binod Sutradhar v Natural Environment Research Council: CA 20 Feb 2004

The defendant council had carried out research into a water supply in India in the 1980s. The claimant drank the water, and claimed damages for having consumed arsenic in it. Held: There is a close link between the tests in law for proximity and foreseeability. The report was a short term pilot report, and could … Continue reading Binod Sutradhar v Natural Environment Research Council: CA 20 Feb 2004

Mortgage Express v Abensons Solicitors (A Firm): ChD 20 Apr 2012

The claimant lender sought damages against the defendant solicitors alleging negligence and breach of fiduciary duty by them in acting for them on mortgage advances. The defendants now argued that the allowance of an amendment to add the allegation of breach of trust had improperly removed a limitation defence. Held: The appeal was allowed. The … Continue reading Mortgage Express v Abensons Solicitors (A Firm): ChD 20 Apr 2012

Davis v Ministry of Defence: CA 26 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

Buckinghamshire County Council v Moran: CA 13 Feb 1989

The parties’ respective properties were separated by a fence or hedge and the true owner had no access to the disputed land. In 1967 the Defendants’ predecessors in title began to maintain the land by mowing the grass and trimming the hedges and using the land for their own purposes. The evidence was that the … Continue reading Buckinghamshire County Council v Moran: CA 13 Feb 1989

Powell v McFarlane: ChD 1977

Intention to Establish Adverse Possession of Land A squatter had occupied the land and defended a claim for possession. The court discussed the conditions necessary to establish an intention to possess land adversely to the paper owner. Held: Slade J said: ‘It will be convenient to begin by restating a few basic principles relating to … Continue reading Powell v McFarlane: ChD 1977

Bradford and Bingley Plc v Rashid: HL 12 Jul 2006

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

Ofulue and Another v Bossert: HL 11 Mar 2009

The parties disputed ownership of land, one claiming adverse possession. In the course of negotations, the possessor made a without prejudice offer to purchase the paper owner’s title. The paper owner claimed that this was an acknowledgement under section 29. Held: The letter should not be admitted. Any admission in the first letter could not … Continue reading Ofulue and Another v Bossert: HL 11 Mar 2009

J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Others v Graham and Another: HL 4 Jul 2002

The claimants sought ownership by adverse possession of land. Once the paper owner had been found, they indicated a readiness to purchase their interest. The court had found that this letter contradicted an animus possidendi. The claimant had overstayed the expiration of a grazing tenancy, and been asked to leave but had not been dispossessed. … Continue reading J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Others v Graham and Another: HL 4 Jul 2002

Hamilton and others v Allied Domecq Plc (Scotland): HL 11 Jul 2007

The pursuers had been shareholders in a company which sold spring water. The defenders took shares in the company in return for promises as to the promotion and distribution of the bottled water. The pursuers said that they had failed to promote it in the way promised. The company failed. At first instance the judge … Continue reading Hamilton and others v Allied Domecq Plc (Scotland): HL 11 Jul 2007

Chambers v London Borough of Havering: CA 20 Dec 2011

The defendant appealed against an order for him to surrender possession of land he had claimed by adverse possession. The Council was the registered proprietor. The defendant said he had used the land since 1981 for dumping of motor vehicle parts. The judge had decided that the defendant had not established factual possession for the … Continue reading Chambers v London Borough of Havering: CA 20 Dec 2011

Topplan Estates Ltd v David Townley: CA 27 Oct 2004

The registered proprietor of land appealed a finding that the defendant had established adverse possession of their land. The claimant had occupied it as part of his farm. Originally there had been a grazing tenancy. The tenancy was terminated, and the land sold, but he did not vacate the land. The new owner granted a … Continue reading Topplan Estates Ltd v David Townley: CA 27 Oct 2004

Collins v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills and Others: CA 23 May 2014

The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for personal injury which had been rejected on basis that it was out of time. He had contracted cancer in 2002, but had recovered. He later came to attribute this to exposure to asbestos at work in the docks up to 1967. He made his claim in … Continue reading Collins v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills and Others: CA 23 May 2014

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Puttick: CA 1981

The applicant, then Astrid Proll, fled bail in Germany when awaiting trial on terrorist charges, entered England and under a false name, and married Mr Puttick. She resisted extradition saying that under the 1948 Act she was now a British National. She appealed against a decision that she could not rely upon her fraudulent behaviour. … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Puttick: CA 1981

Regina (Smeaton) v Secretary of State for Health and Others: Admn 18 Apr 2002

The claimant challenged the Order as regards the prescription of the morning-after pill, asserting that the pill would cause miscarriages, and that therefore the use would be an offence under the 1861 Act. Held: ‘SPUC’s case is that any interference with a fertilised egg, if it leads to the loss of the egg, involves the … Continue reading Regina (Smeaton) v Secretary of State for Health and Others: Admn 18 Apr 2002

BMW Financial Service (GB) Ltd v Hart: CA 10 Oct 2012

This appeal is concerned with a point of limitation arising out of a standard hire purchase contract concerning a car. The respondent had failed to maintain his payments, and theappelleants issued a termination notice. He was abroad fr a while, and the car repossessed and sold in his absence. Much later, the company sued for … Continue reading BMW Financial Service (GB) Ltd v Hart: CA 10 Oct 2012

Young v Downey: QBD 18 Dec 2019

Responsibility for IRA bombing fixed The claimant sought a finding that the defendant had been responsible for a IRA bombing in 1982 which killed her father and three other soldiers and injured 31 others. He had been acquitted at a criminal trial. Held: The limitation period was extended: ‘As was said in Carroll, the burden … Continue reading Young v Downey: QBD 18 Dec 2019

Bowling and Co Solicitors v Edehomo: ChD 2 Mar 2011

The court was asked ‘when an innocent vendor whose signature is forged on the documents for the conveyance of land suffers damage, for the purposes of limitation of an action arising from a solicitor’s breach of duty. Is it on the exchange of contracts, in which case the present claim is said to be time … Continue reading Bowling and Co Solicitors v Edehomo: ChD 2 Mar 2011

Bogdanic v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: QBD 29 Aug 2014

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

Hopper and Another v Hopper: CA 12 Dec 2008

Appeals were made after an order declaring an account a between former partners in a wholesale fruit and vegetable business. The dispute related to the applicability of limitation to undrawn profit shares, and the doctrine of Laches. Held: The judge had been entitled to find on the evidence that undrawn profits had been capitalised. There … Continue reading Hopper and Another v Hopper: CA 12 Dec 2008

Evans v Amicus Healthcare Ltd and others: CA 25 Jun 2004

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

St Anselm Development Company Ltd v Slaughter and May: ChD 1 Feb 2013

The claimants appealed against rejection of their claim in negligence said to have been out of time. They had set out to sublet flats but their mistiming disallowed reclaiming of certain rents under the 1993 Act. Held: The two flats were to be considered seperately, and on that basis the claim under the second had … Continue reading St Anselm Development Company Ltd v Slaughter and May: ChD 1 Feb 2013

Nolan v Wright: ChD 26 Feb 2009

The defendant sought to re-open the question of whether the charge under which he might otherwise be liable was an extortionate credit bargain. The creditor said that that plea was time barred. The defendant argued that a finding that the agreement amounted to an extortionate bargain would not be a substantive relief, and was therefore … Continue reading Nolan v Wright: ChD 26 Feb 2009

Deutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc v Inland Revenue and Another: HL 25 Oct 2006

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