MEMBER NEWS: “ON DEMAND” CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF WEBINARS AVAILABLE TO WATCH AT A TIME AND PLACE TO SUIT YOU: WITH DISCOUNTS FOR CLB MEMBERS
Last week we looked at webinars coming up which may be of interest to CLB readers. CLB members can obtain a discount on these webinars. The same discount applies to webinars which are now available “on demand”. These webinars are…
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2025 (1): LIMITATION IN PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS – HOW DOES ANYONE MISS A THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?
In an ideal world all personal injury limitation periods would be three years, and all other action six. However we do not live in an ideal world. The first, and most obvious, place to look at avoiding negligence claims is…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 10: WAS THIS CLAIM STATUTE BARRED?IF SO SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION UNDER SECTION 33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980?
Here we look at a decision in relation to limitation. The trial judge had to determine whether the claimant’s action was statute barred. If it was she then had to consider whether it was appropriate to exercise the court’s discretion…
AVOIDING PROBLEMS IN CIVIL LITIGATION 1: HOW DOES ANYBODY MISS A LIMITATION PERIOD?
This is the first in the promised series about avoiding problems in civil litigation. The most obvious place to start is with limitation issues. These sometimes prove particularly problematic for personal injury and clinical negligence lawyers. However there is no…
CLAIM WAS (ARGUABLY) ISSUED IN TIME WHEN IT ARRIVED AT THE COURT: LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM DOES NOT DEPRIVE THE COURT OF JURISDICTION
Today we are looking at a case that raises important issues. The judge decided that calling someone gay is not defamatory. However here we are not concerned with the substantive issues but two procedural issues raised in the case. Firstly…
ADDING AN ADDITIONAL PARTY TO A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD: THE TEST IS THAT OF DESIRABILITY RATHER THAN NECESSITY
In Doroudvash v Zurich Insurance PLC [2025] EWCC 10 HHJ Holmes identified a route whereby the claimant in a personal injury case could join an additional defendant into an action after the expiry of the initial limitation period. This construction…
THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LAW OF LIMITATION AND CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE: DOES THIS GIVE RISE TO A PRACTICAL PROBLEM FOR PRACTITIONERS AND VICTIMS?
In a webinar on limitation tomorrow I am considering, among many other issues, the government’s proposals on changes to limitation in child sexual abuse cases. In particular whether there is a practical dilemma for practitioners with actions that are pending. …
AVOIDING LIMITATION PROBLEMS AND MAKING AN EFFECTIVE SECTION 33 APPLICATION: WEBINAR 20th FEBRUARY 2025
Limitation issues feature regularly on this blog and are a major reason for litigators being sued. This webinar looks at the major problem areas in limitation for personal injury and clinical negligence litigators. It identifies, and helps litigators avoid, all…
BITCOINS IN THE TIP: DEFENDANT COUNCIL GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENT ON LIMITATION DESCRIBED AS “DESPERATE”
In Howells v Newport City Council [2025] EWHC 22 (Ch) HHJ Keyser KC granted summary judgment to the defendant council in an unusual case. The claimant was seeking to recover a computer hard drive which had been put in the…
SECOND ACTION STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: HIDING AN INTENTION TO START FRESH PROCEEDINGS IS A HIGHLY DANGEROUS STRATEGY
In BCLI v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis [2024] EWHC 3018 (KB) HHJ Karen Walden-Smith (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) struck out a claimant’s second action against the defendant police force. The action failed because,…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM – ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 6: YOU’RE SUING THE WRONG PARTY: THE LAW OF AMENDMENT AND MISTAKE CONSIDERED
This is the sixth time we have looked at the judgment in Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v Bellway Homes Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 1579 (KB). Technically speaking we are not looking at issues relating to service of the…
AVOIDING LIMITATION PROBLEMS AND THE (POSSIBLE) LIFELINE OF SECTION 33: WEBINAR 29th MAY 2024
Over the year this blog has recorded many cases of claimants (but not always claimants) coming to grief because of limitation issues. This webinar is designed to help practitioners avoid limitation problems, looking at major problem areas, common mistakes and…
AN INTERESTING JUDGMENT ON LIMITATION: CHEQUES, PAYMENT AND DEMAND: SECOND DEMAND DOES NOT RE-OPEN THE LIMITATION PERIOD
In Agia v Skipton Building Society [2024] EW Misc 14 (CC) HHJ Malek considered a novel point relating to limitation. A limitation period cannot be “re-opened” by a customer making a demand on a bank many decades after a cheque…
SECTION 33 APPLICATION IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: THE SINS OF THE SOLICITORS WERE NOT VISITED UPON THE CLAIMANT: ACTION ALLOWED TO PROCEED WHEN IT WAS 5 1/2 YEARS OUT OF TIME
We looked at the judgment in Shaw v Maguire (Re Preliminary Issues) [2023] EWHC 2155 (KB) in an earlier post where Master Cook held that the court had a discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 in a fatal…
FATAL ACCIDENTS AND LIMITATION: THERE IS NO BAR TO SECTION 33 BEING USED IF THE LIMITATION PERIOD EXPIRED PRIOR TO DECEASED PERSON’S DEATH
In Shaw v Maguire (Re Preliminary Issues) [2023] EWHC 2155 (KB) Master Cook considered an issue relating to limitation, Section 33 and fatal accident claims. Can a claimant rely on Section 33 in circumstances where the limitation period had expired…
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION: A RECAP OF THE FIRST SERIES
As part of the scroll through the “back catalogue” on this blog we are looking at the series from 2013 on avoiding negligence. Remember that this series was written 10 years ago. There may have been some changes since then,…
CLAIMANT’S CONVENTION CLAIM DISMISSED FOLLOWING ATTEMPT TO AMEND AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD
I am grateful to Barrister Katherine Howells for sending me a copy of the judgment in Hallett -v- TUI Airways Limited, a copy of which is available here Approved Judgment Hallett v TUI Airways Limited. The case deals with the…
SECTION 33 APPLICATION ALLOWED IN ACTION ISSUED 4 YEARS AFTER LIMITATION EXPIRED
In Tyers v Aegis Defence Services (BVI) Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 896 (KB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer allowed an application under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 in a case where the proceedings were issued 7 years after…
FAILURE TO SERVE A DEFENDANT PROPERLY AND ISSUING OUT OF TIME: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Muhammad v Daily The News International & Ors (Rev1) [2023] EWHC 674 (KB) Master Cook determined a number of procedural issues. Here we look at two: (1) the failure to serve on a defendant properly; (2) the question of…
AVOIDING LIMITATION PROBLEMS IN PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 29th SEPTEMBER 2022
On the 29th September 2022 I am presenting a webinar “Avoiding Limitation Problems”. This deals with the major issues relating to limitation in personal injury actions. Booking details are available here. THE CONTENTS OF THE WEBINAR Basic limitation periods,…
THE 10 YEAR LONGSTOP PERIOD IN PRODUCT LIABILITY CLAIMS: A POINT TO WATCH
There is one very tricky area of limitation law that I wanted to return to following the judgment in Coote -v- Ullstein [2022] EWHC 606 (QB). The case was looked at in detail here. However I want to concentrate on the…
WEBINARS ON KEEPING YOUR COOL: UNDERSETTLEMENT, PROCEDURAL PITFALLS AND LIMITATION PROBLEMS: AVOIDING MATTERS HEATING UP WHEN THE HEATWAVE IS OVER
In September I am presenting a number of webinars with the theme of “avoiding problems”. These are avoiding undersettlement: avoiding procedural pitfalls and avoiding problems with limitation. “AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: A GUIDE FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS” 19th September 2022 …
COURT EXTENDS TIME TO BRING HUMAN RIGHTS ACT CLAIM: MINOR CLAIMANTS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR
In CJ & Ors Wiltshire Police [2022] EWHC 1661 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer extended the limitation period in a claim under the Human Rights Act. Although the claimants were ultimately unsuccessful there are important observations in relation to the…
A CLAIMANT WHO OBTAINS AN ORDER UNDER SECTION 33 IS “SUCCESSFUL”: COSTS, CONDUCT AND INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS CONSIDERED
In Aderounmu v Colvin (Costs) [2022] EWHC 637 (QB) Master David Cook made an order for costs in favour of a claimant who had succeeded on a preliminary issue. A discount was made because certain aspects of the case had…
COURT REFUSES TO EXTEND TIME IN HUMAN RIGHTS ACT CLAIM: THERE IS NO RIGHT TO LITIGATE – THAT IS WHAT LIMITATION IS
In Rafiq v Thurrock Borough Council [2022] EWHC 584 (QB) Mrs Justice Collins Rice refused a claimant’s for an extension of time to a claimant bringing a claim under the Human Rights Act. The judgment is a reminder that there…
10 MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION THAT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER SHOULD KNOW
Here we look at ten “myths” (that is misconceptions) about limitation that can lead to personal injury litigators getting into difficulties. This is not the first time these issues have been examined on these blog. However these continue to be…
LIMITATION, SEXUAL ABUSE AND THE SECTION 33 DISCRETION: A FAIR TRIAL WAS NOT POSSIBLE AND CLAIMANTS’ ACTION DISMISSED
The previous post looked at the decision in TVZ & Ors v Manchester City Football Club [2022] EWHC 7 (QB) in relation to the issue of vicarious liability. However it is important to note that the claimants did not succeed in…
AVOIDING PROBLEMS WITH LIMITATION AND MAKING A SECTION 33 APPLICATION: WEBINAR 13th JANUARY 2022
On the 13th January 2022 I am giving a webinar on Avoiding Problems with Limitation and making a Section 33 application. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR The webinar looks at recent cases about limitation in personal injury…
“A SOLICITOR, NO MATTER HOW EXPERIENCED OR INEXPERIENCED, MUST BE TAKEN TO KNOW THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES”
That quotation, taken from the judgment of HHJ Bird in Holterman v Electrium (2020) EWHC 3915 ( TCC) was chosen by Professor Dominic Regan as his “thought of the year” in a recent tweet. Since there are 3208 pages in…
CLAIMANT WAS VICTIM OF FRAUD BUT ITS ACTION IS STATUTE BARRED: SECTION 32 (1) OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980 CONSIDERED
In European Real Estate Debt Fund (Cayman) Ltd v Treon & Ors [2021] EWHC 2866 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles made many findings adverse to the defendants. However the claim failed because it was statute barred. The judgment considers the issue…
LITIGATION, DELAY AND THE DOCTRINE OF LACHES: IT WOULD BE “UNCONSCIONABLE FOR THE COURT TO GRANT THE APPLICANT ANY RELIEF”
The judgment of ICC Judge Barber in CSB 123 Ltd, Re [2021] EWHC 2506 (Ch)is interesting for a large number of reasons. Not least the total failure of the applicant to establish major (if not all) parts of its case,…
SECTION 33 CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: TRIAL JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO EXERCISE THEIR DISCRETION
In Blackpool Football Club Ltd v DSN [2021] EWCA Civ 1352 the Court of Appeal considered, and upheld, a decision on Section 33 where the discretion was exercised in favour of the claimant. This was in the context, however, of…
LIMITATION, THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE AND THE SECTION 33 DISCRETION: THE SINS OF THE LAWYER CANNOT NECESSARILY BE PASSED ONTO THE CLIENT
The judgment of Richard Hermer QC, sitting as a High Court Judge, in Wilkins v University Hospital North Midlands NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 2164 (QB) deals with several important elements of limitation in the context of clinical negligence. Firstly the…
“THIS CASE SHOULD ONCE AGAIN SERVE AS A REMINDER TO LITIGANTS THAT LEAVING THE ISSUE OF A CLAIM FORM TO THE ELEVENTH HOUR OF LIMITATION IS AN EXTREMELY RISK APPROACH TO TAKE AND SHOULD BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS”: ISSUE AND THE ELECTRONIC WORKING SYSTEM
The decision of Deputy Master Grimshaw in ABC & Ors v The London Borough of Lambeth [2021] EWHC 2057 (QB) is, I think, the first to consider the question of the date of issue in the Electronic Working System. It…
LIMITATION: SECTION 33 CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A CLAIM FOR SEXUAL ABUSE: DISCRETION EXERCISED WHEN PROCEEDINGS ISSUED 15 YEARS OUTSIDE THE LIMITATION PERIOD
In AB v Chethams School of Music [2021] EWHC 1419 (QB) Mr Justice Fordham provides a comprehensive review of the principles the court considers when hearing an application under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980, particularly in the context…
WHEN DOES THE LIMITATION PERIOD START TO RUN WHEN A BARRISTER GIVES TWO ADVICES?
In Sciortino v Beaumont [2021] EWCA Civ 786 the Court of Appeal allowed a claimant’s appeal against a finding that a negligence action against a barrister was statute barred. Although this is a case about limitation and negligence it has…
DIRECT AND VICARIOUS LIABILITY FOR SELF-EMPLOYED MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS WORKING WITHIN A PRACTICE: CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL IN HER ARGUMENTS
I am grateful to Heather Owen from the Dental Law Partnership for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Harrison in Breakingbury -v- Croad (Cardiff County Court 19th April 2021), a copy of which is available here …
IN THE MIDNIGHT HOUR – THE SUPREMES’ VERSION: WHEN DOES THE LIMITATION PERIOD START TO RUN? (“WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES”)
Regular readers of this blog would reasonably suppose that lawyers like to live dangerously – leaving tasks to the last minute (and sometimes beyond). An example of this can be seen in the judgment today in Matthew & Ors v…
CASE AGAINST SOLICITORS WAS STATUTE BARRED: THE DANGERS OF MAKING ASSUMPTIONS IN RELATION TO LIMITATION PERIODS (AND WAITING SIX YEARS IN ANY EVENT)
In Elliott v Hattens Solicitors (a firm) [2021] EWCA Civ 720 the Court of Appeal found that an action against a firm of solicitors was statute barred. The loss had occurred more than six years prior to the date of…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: SCOTTISH LAW: LIMITATION AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME: A LESSON HERE FOR US ALL
In Johnson v Berentzen & Anor [2021] EWHC 1042 (QB) Mrs Justice Stacey considered a case where a claimant inadvertently fell foul of Scottish limitation law. In Scottish cases proceedings need to be served within the three year period, it…
LIMITATION AND THE CLAIMANT’S STATUS: COURT OF APPEAL NOT TOO SYMPATHETIC TO DEFENDANTS WHO HAVE COMMITTED FRAUD
In OT Computers Ltd v Infineon Technologies Ag & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 501 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that an action brought by a company that was in liquidation was not statute barred. “It is, moreover,…
SECTION 33 DISCRETION CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A SEXUAL ABUSE CLAIM
In SKX v Manchester City Council [2021] EWHC 782 (QB) Mr Justice Cavanagh considered the exercise of the discretion under Section 33 in the context of a claim for sexual abuse. The context was somewhat unusual in that the judge…
CHILDREN AND LIMITATION IN FATAL ACCIDENTS: LIMITATION AND THE DEATH OF CHILDREN
The law of limitation for Fatal Accidents Act claims for children is often misunderstood. Here we look at the limitation period in relation to fatal accident claims and children. There are two issues: the limitation period when any of…
LIMITATION AND EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS: CLAIMANT DID NOT HAVE ACTUAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE & ACTION ISSUED WITHIN TIME
In Balls v Reeve & Anor [2021] EWHC 751 (QB) David Pittaway QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) found that the claimant’s date of knowledge was not more than three years prior to issue. THE CASE…
JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIMS OF CLAIMANTS JOINED INTO ACTION AFTER CLAIM FORM WAS ISSUED: WHEN AMENDED PLEADINGS START TO RESEMBLE A RAINBOW
The case of Various Claimants v G4S Plc [2021] EWHC 524 (Ch)is one that bristles with procedural issues. Here we look at one issue – the judge striking out the claimants that were added after issue of the claim form…
THE FOREIGN LIMITATION PERIOD: ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, PUBLIC POLICY – AND A BASIC ERROR ABOUT THE DATE: CLAIMANT HAS TO FALL BACK ON “UNDUE HARDSHIP” ARGUMENT
The Court of Appeal decision in Begum v Maran (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 326 contains some interesting observations on the law of tort and duty of care. However the claimant in this case faces another fundamental challenge. There is…
AVOIDING PROBLEMS: TWELVE THINGS FOR LITIGATORS TO THINK ABOUT IN MARCH
I am here re-visiting advice first given in 2016. However everything written then appears equally valid today. Indeed the contents of this blog over the past five years serves basically amplifies every issue raised here. 1. NEVER, EVER, GUESS ABOUT…
AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT”: NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
The issue of non-payment, or under-payment, of court fees was considered by the Court of Appeal in the judgment today in Butters & Anor v Hayes [2021] EWCA Civ 252. THE CASE During the course of an action the court…
WEBINAR ON AVOIDING PROBLEMS IN LIMITATION: 4th FEBRUARY 2021
On the 4th February I am giving a webinar “Limitation Avoiding Problems and Pitfalls”. THE WEBINAR This webinar looks at the major problem areas in limitation for personal injury litigants. It identifies, and helps litigators avoid, all those difficult areas…
CLAIMANTS SUED THE WRONG (NON-EXISTENT) DEFENDANT – AND THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAD EXPIRED: DON’T START BREAKING THE CROCKERY JUST YET
In The 52 Occupiers of the Ceramic Works v Bowmer & Kirkland Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 17 (TCC) District Judge Baldwin considered an application to substitute a defendant after the primary limitation period had expired. The judge, if anything,…
You must be logged in to post a comment.