It was questionable whether plaintiffs should be allowed the benefit of the full limitation period with virtual impunity where the facts are known and there is no obstacle to the speedy institution and prosecution of claims.
Unreported, 18 June 1987, Transcript No 592 of 1987
Doubted – Department of Transport v Chris Smaller (Transport) Ltd HL 1989
An application had been made to strike out a claim for want of prosecution. The writ was not issued until the end of the relevant six year limitation period and then not served for a further nine months. The period of inexcusable delay after action . .
Cited – Grovit and others v Doctor and others HL 24-Apr-1997
The plaintiff began a defamation action against seven defendants. Each had admitted publication but pleaded justification. The claims against the fourth to seventh defendants were dismissed by consent, and the third had gone into liquidation. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.214298