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 been timely, provided the period could be extended under section 14A.
In 1999 the claimant had realised that there was a problem, even if they did not then attribute it to negligence in the solicitors. They had reasonable cause then to start asking questions. Even though there had not yet been diclosure, the master had been correct that the claimant had no reasonable prospect establishing an extended limitation period.
David Richards J
[2013] EWHC 125 (Ch)
Bailii
Limitation Act 1980 14A, Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Khan v R M Falvey and Co (a Firm) CA 22-Mar-2002
The claimant sought damages from his former solicitors for failing to act to avoid his case being struck out. The second action was itself delayed, and the defendants asserted that the cause of action occurred not when his claim was actually struck . .
Cited – Haward and others v Fawcetts HL 1-Mar-2006
The claimant sought damages from his accountants, claiming negligence. The accountants pleaded limitation. They had advised him in connection with an investment in a company which investment went wrong.
Held: It was argued that the limitation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Limitation, Professional Negligence
Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.470707
