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
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
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
Baron Parke said: ‘It is quite clear that a promissory note, payable on demand, is a present debt, and is payable without any demand, and the statute begins to run from the date of it.’ Judges: Baron Parke Citations: [1837] EngR 183, (1837) 2 M and W 461, (1837) 150 ER 839 Links: Commonlii Jurisdiction: … Continue reading Norton v Ellam: 1837
The buyer bought 30lbs of cabbage seed, but the seed was not correct, and the crop was worthless. The seed cost pounds 192, but the farmer lost pounds 61,000. The seed supplier appealed the award of the larger amount and interest, saying that their contract limited their liability to the cost of the seed. Held: … Continue reading George Mitchell (Chesterhall) Ltd v Finney Lock Seeds Ltd: CA 29 Sep 1982
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
(Charges and Charging Orders : Bankruptcy and Insolvency) Applicant and 2nd Respondent were the registered proprietors of the property; 1st Respondent had a registered charge dated 1993. Nothing had been paid and no interest had accrued under the charge since 1993. A applied to have the charge removed. R1 objected on the basis that it … Continue reading Khela v Batshoof Investment Lte and Another: LRA 7 Aug 2017
The Police appealed from a finding that the claim brought by a former constable was not out of time. He had worked under cover making drugs purchases, and had become addicted to heroin. Held: The appeal failed. Judges: Sir Terence Etherton MR Citations: [2017] EWCA Civ 1992, [2018] 4 WLR 32, [2017] WLR(D) 818 Links: … Continue reading Greater Manchester Police v Carroll: CA 1 Dec 2017
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
Judges: Lord Justice Simon Brown Lord Justice Mummery And Lord Justice Latham Citations: [2000] EWCA Civ 303, [2002] 1 P and CR 18, [2000] EGCS 148, (2001) 33 HLR 44 Links: Bailii Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Limitation, Land Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.147336
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
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
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
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
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
Decomposed Snail in Ginger Beer Bottle – Liability The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a friend, … Continue reading Donoghue (or M’Alister) v Stevenson: HL 26 May 1932
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
Lord Kerr, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Briggs [2018] UKSC 14, [2018] 2 BCLC 311, [2018] WLR(D) 130 Bailii, Bailii Summary Limitation Act 1980 21 32 England and Wales Limitation Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.605620
The claimant alleged that the defendant, her stepfather, had sexually and otherwise assaulted her when she was a child. He had pleaded guilty to one charge in 1978, and now said that the claim was out of time. The claimant sought the extension of time for the claim on a just and equitable basis under … Continue reading RAR v GGC: QBD 10 Aug 2012
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
The claimant had begin proceedings against the defendant legal publishers, saying that their summary of a cash had brought was defamatory. He now sought leave to extend the limitation period for his claim, and the defendants argued that, given the very limited publication, the case was not worth pursuing. Held: There had been considerable delay, … Continue reading Bewry v Reed Elseveir (UK) Ltd and Another: QBD 10 Oct 2013
The Court was asked whether the justices had had power under section 4(2) to impose reporting restrictions on committal proceedings pending the trial to which they related.. Held: They had. A premature publication in contravention of a postponement order under section 4(2) of which the publisher was aware is a contempt of court notwithstanding section … Continue reading Regina v Horsham Justices ex parte Farquharson: CA 1982
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
The claimant had been convicted and served his time for possession of a large collection of obsolete or antique firearms. He now sought their return. The police replied that he was in any event out of time. Held: ‘Section 3(2) of the 1980 Act is, at least in the context of that Act, a somewhat … Continue reading Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis v Meekey: Admn 12 Jan 2021
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
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
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 defendant had been tried for murder. The plaintiff now sought civil damages. The defendant replied that the case was brought out of time, and now appealed against the court’s extension of the time limit on the basis that the plaintiff had not known of the possibility of civil action. Held: It was no reproach … Continue reading Halford v Brooks: CA 1991
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
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 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
His Honour Judge Lewis [2021] EWHC 3052 (QB) Bailii Limitation Act 1980 4A 32A England and Wales Defamation, Limitation Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.669938
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
A promissory note executed on 30 June 1988, payable on demand. The promissory note was executed as a deed and therefore was a speciality falling under section 8 of the Limitation Act 1980, with a limitation period of 12 years. No demand was made for payment under the note within the period of 12 years. … Continue reading Allendale Ltd v Moualem: CA 6 Jul 2004
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
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 first defendant solicitor misappropriated money from an estate he was administering. The beneficiaries later commenced proceedings against his wife, alleging knowing assistance. She said that that claim was out of time. The claimant responded said that any limitation period was disapplied as ‘any fraud or fraudulent breach of trust to which the trustee was … Continue reading Cattley and Another v Pollard and Another: ChD 7 Dec 2006
Foetus has no Established Human Rights The Claimants sought a declaration that section 1(1)(d) of the Abortion Act 1967, as amended, is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’), as well as some other remedies. The claimant had Down’s Syndrome, and complained the readiness to abort foetuses with identified Down’s genes – more … Continue reading Crowter and Others, Regina (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health And Social Care: Admn 23 Sep 2021
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
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 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
Counterclaim not exempt from limitation by right The claimant firms of solicitors sought to recover their fees from their former clients. In answer the defendants sought to say that they should be allowed to counterclaim in negligence saying that as a counterclaim, section 35(3) of the 1980 Act operated to allow the counterclaim as of … Continue reading Al-Rawas v Hassan Khan and Co (A Firm) and Another: CA 1 Feb 2017
In the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce, questions arose regarding company assets owned by the husband. The court was asked as to the power of the court to order the transfer of assets owned entirely in the company’s names. The judge had made such an order, finding evidence that the companies had … Continue reading Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others: SC 12 Jun 2013
The claimant received injuries when arrested. He was later convicted of resisting arrest. The defendant relied on section 329 of the 2003 Act. The claimant said that the force used against him was grossly disproportionate. The commissioner appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim, saying that consent to the action should have been … Continue reading Adorian v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: CA 23 Jan 2009
The respondent Ministry had, in 1958, conducted experimental atmospheric explosions of atomic weapons. The claimants had been obliged as servicemen to observe the explosions, and appealed against dismissal of their claims for radiation sickness under the 1980 Act. They said that they had only acquired the knowledge to found an action in 2007 on the … Continue reading Ministry of Defence v AB and Others: SC 14 Mar 2012
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
The land-owner had planning permission to erect a barn, conditional on its use for agricultural purposes. He built inside it a house and lived there from 2002. In 2006. He then applied for a certificate of lawful use. The inspector allowed it, and the Council appealed. The Council now also argued that parliament could not … Continue reading Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council: SC 6 Apr 2011
The Movement sought to challenge decisions of the Secretary of state to give economic aid to the Pergau Dam, saying that it was not required ‘for the purpose of promoting the development’ of Malaysia. It was said to be uneconomic and damaging. It was said by the defendant’s advisers to be an abuse of the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ex Parte the World Development Movement Ltd: Admn 10 Nov 1994
Each claimant sought damages for a criminal assault for which the defendant was said to be responsible. Each claim was to be out of the six year limitation period. In the first claim, the proposed defendant had since won a substantial sum from the National Lottery. They complained that the Limitation Act gave the court … Continue reading A v Hoare; H v Suffolk County Council, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening; X and Y v London Borough of Wandsworth: CA 12 Apr 2006
Implied promise to pay arbitral award The parties disputed how limitation affects the enforcement of an arbitration award. More than six years had passed since the award had been made, and the defendant said it was out of time. Held: A party can enforce an award either by ordinary action as an action founded upon … Continue reading National Ability Sa v Tinna Oils and Chemicals Ltd: CA 11 Dec 2009
A mother signed a mortgage deed charging her property to H as security for a loan to her son. She claimed the solicitor had been negligent in his advice. The solicitor replied that the claim was out of time. The loss accrued not when demand for payment was made, but when she signed the mortgage … Continue reading Forster v Outred and Co: CA 1981
The claimants alleged professional negligence in advice given by the defendant on a share purchase, saying that it should have been structured to reduce Capital Gains Tax. The defendants denied negligence and said the claim was statute barred. Held: The defence in fact was that the claimant had both brought the claim too early because … Continue reading Pegasus Management Holdings Sca and Another v Ernst and Young (A Firm) and Another: ChD 11 Nov 2008
There are no degrees of nullity The plaintiffs had owned mining property in Egypt. Their interests were damaged and or sequestrated and they sought compensation from the Respondent Commission. The plaintiffs brought an action for the declaration rejecting their claims was a nullity. The Commission replied that the courts were precluded from considering the question … Continue reading Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission: HL 17 Dec 1968
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
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 employers until she left in 1991. Held: The … Continue reading Coad v Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Health Authority: CA 17 Jul 1996
Extent of Counsel’s Immunity in Negligence The House considered the extent of a barrister’s immunity from action in negligence, and particularly whether it covered pre-trial acts or omissions in connection with civil proceedings. Held: A barrister’s immunity from suit extended only to such pre-trial work as was intimately connected with the conduct of the case … Continue reading Saif Ali v Sydney Mitchell and Co (a Firm): HL 1978
The claimant’s employment by the bank had been terminated. The parties disputed the sums due, and the date of the termination of the contract. The court was asked ‘Does a repudiation of a contract of employment by the employer which takes the form of an express and immediate dismissal automatically terminate the contract?’ Held: Mr … Continue reading Societe Generale, London Branch v Geys: SC 19 Dec 2012
The claimants alleged professional negligence by the defendant solicitors in advising them to agree to a postponment of a completion. The defendants raised as a preliminary issue the question of limitation. The claimant said that the limitation period did not commence until the damage became more than contingent. Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. Arden LJ … Continue reading Watkins and Another v Jones Maidment Wilson (A Firm): CA 4 Mar 2008
A firm of solicitors had a member involved in a substantial fraud. The defendant firm of accountants certified the firm’s accounts. There were later many calls upon the compensation fund operated by the claimants, who sought recovery in turn from the accountants. The accountants pleaded limitation. Held: The Law Society faced a contingent liability on … Continue reading Law Society v Sephton and Co (a Firm) and Others: HL 10 May 2006
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 applicant alleged that the rule under United Kingdom law whereby each time material is downloaded from the Internet a new cause of action in libel proceedings accrued (‘the Internet publication rule’) constituted an unjustifiable and disproportionate restriction on its right to freedom of expression. Held: The rule did engage the claimants right of free … Continue reading Times Newspapers Ltd (Nos. 1 And 2) v The United Kingdom: ECHR 10 Mar 2009
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
The activities of a long established cricket club had been found to be a legal nuisance, because of the number of cricket balls landing in the gardens of neighbouring houses. An injunction had been granted to local householders who complained of cricket balls landing in their gardens. The defendant appealed. Held: A factor to be … Continue reading Miller v Jackson: CA 6 Apr 1977
The claimant sought to have disapplied the limitation period in his defamation claim. The claimant said that in the case of Cain, the Steedman case had not been cited, and that the decisions were incompatible, and that Cain was to be prefered. Held: The appeal failed. The two cases could be reconciled. Considerations in defamation … Continue reading Brady v Norman: CA 9 Feb 2011
Res Gestae to admit circumstances of complaint (Victoria) Evidence had been admitted under the res gestae rule, that a woman making a telephone call was in a hysterical state. Held: It was properly used. Where a statement is made either by the victim of an attack or by a bystander, which is itself hearsay, but … Continue reading Ratten v The Queen: PC 1 Jul 1971
The claimant beneficiary in the estate sought damages against solicitors who had acted for the claimant’s brother, the administrator, saying they had allowed him to take control of the assets in the estate. The will provided that property was to be transferred only if the claimant’s brother paid all the Inheritance Tax. It was transferred … Continue reading Roberts v Gill and Co Solicitors and Others: SC 19 May 2010
Simple interest only on rate swap damages The bank had paid money to the local authority under a contract which turned out to be ultra vires and void. The question was whether, in addition to ordering the repayment of the money to the bank on unjust enrichment principles, the court could also award compound interest. … Continue reading Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council: HL 22 May 1996
Innocent third Party May still have duty to assist The plaintiffs sought discovery from the defendants of documents received by them innocently in the exercise of their statutory functions. They sought to identify people who had been importing drugs unlawfully manufactured in breach of their patents. Held: Disclosure should be ordered. If someone, even innocently … Continue reading Norwich Pharmacal Co and others v Customs and Excise Commissioners: HL 26 Jun 1973
The appellants said they had suffered abuse while resident at children’s homes run by the respondents. The respondents denied the allegations and said that they were also out of time. The claims were brought many years after the events. Held: The issues had been properly examined in the Court of Session and a discretion exercised. … Continue reading Bowden v Poor Sisters of Nazareth and others and similar: HL 21 May 2008
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 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 enquired why only some 10 years after the event. He was told … Continue reading Forbes v Wandsworth Health Authority: CA 21 Mar 1996
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 quite different in magnitude from anything notified to them before, almost seven years to the day after the accident, and where there … Continue reading McDonnell and Another v Walker: CA 24 Nov 2009
A attended the defendant’s schools between 1977 and 1988. He had always experienced difficulties with reading and writing and as an adult found those difficulties to be an impediment in his employment. He believed them to be the cause of the depression, panic and lack of self-esteem which he suffered. He consulted his doctor about … Continue reading Adams v Bracknell Forest Borough Council: HL 17 Jun 2004
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
Limitation operates as a defence, and therefore it is for he who sets it up to establish it, and prove that the claim was time barred. Once the initial limitation period had elapsed, it was for the plaintiff to assert that the date of knowledge . .
The plaintiff, the mother and administratrix of the estate of a 16 year old girl, alleged that her daughter had been murdered by one or both of the Defendants. The claim was for damages for battery. Rougier J at first instance had decided that: . .
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 . .
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: . .
(Antigua and Barbuda) The parties disputed a claim for land by adverse possession.
Held: Any acknowledgement of a paper title must be in writing. Lord Templeman explained the rule against reliance upon oral acknowledgements in adverse . .
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 . .
In claims for damages for child abuse at a children’s home made out of the six year time limit time were effectively time barred, with no discretion for the court to extend that limit. The damage occurred at the time when the child left the home. A . .
The claimant sought damages for having been raped. The defendant said the claim was out of time. . .
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 . .
Our law-index is a substantial selection from our database. Cases here are restricted in number by date and lack the additional facilities formerly available within lawindexpro. Please do enjoy this free version of the lawindex. Case law does not ‘belong’ to lawyers. Judgments are made up of words which can be read and understood (if … Continue reading law index