The limitation period did not run whilst relevant facts were deliberately concealed after the damage had been concealed. Section 32 could apply where the concealment of the relevant fact took place after the event as well as at the time of it. The section was intended ‘to ensure that the Act does not operate to bar the claim of a plaintiff whose ignorance of the relevant facts is due to the improper actions of the defendant.’
Judges:
Lord Browne-Wilkinson
Citations:
Times 05-May-1995, Gazette 07-Jun-1995, Independent 09-May-1995, [1996] 1 AC 102
Statutes:
Limitation Act 1932 11(1)(b) 32(1)(b)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Sheldon and Others v R H Outhwaite (Underwriting Agencies) Ltd and Others CA 1-Jul-1994
Concealment by Defendant after the event does not stop time running against Plaintiff. . .
Cited by:
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Limitation
Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.89209