GOBBETS AND LIMITATION: ISSUES AT THE DREAMING SPIRES
There are many fascinating aspects of the judgment in Siddiqui v The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford [2018] EWHC 184 (QB). As is often the case I have chosen to concentrate on one of the most prosaic…
LIMITATION: DISEMBARKATION AND THE TWO YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD: THE BARQUE AND THE BIGHT
In Collins v Lawrence [2017] EWCA 2268 Civ Lord Justice Hamblen considered an issue under limitation and the Convention Relating to Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea (the “Athens Convention”). It serves as an important reminder that many cases…
SEEKING AN EXTENSION OF TIME – WHEN YOU ARE 9 1/2 YEARS LATE: THE IMPORTANCE OF A SOLICITOR KEEPING A RECORD
Section 4 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 provides that a claim under the Act should normally be brought within six months of the date on which representation is taken out. An action brought at a…
LIMITATION AMNESTIES: AN INTERESTING CASE
There is an interesting case comment on the DACbeachcroft website in relation to limitation amnesties. Andrews v South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust The comment is by Joe Walton. It reports a case where a claimant sought an extension of…
THE FOREIGN LIMITATION PERIOD ACT 1984: PUBLIC POLICY AND UNDUE HARDSHIP: NOT PART OF THE “STAR WARS” DEFENCE
In Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc & Ors v Zhunus & Ors [2017] EWHC 3374 (Comm) Mr Justice Picken considered Section 2 of the Foreign Limitation Periods Act 1984. The judge held that he would have extended the limitation period on public policy…
SECTION 33 DISCRETION UPHELD: ERRORS OF THE LAWYERS NOT NECESSARILY LAID AT THE DOOR OF A CLAIMANT
In Greater Manchester Police v Carroll [2017] EWCA Civ 1992 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the circuit judge allowing the claimant’s application under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980. The case is interesting because it supports the…
THE HIPPOCRATIC OATH AND LEGAL HYPOCRISY: WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM DOCTORS?
Lawyers, particularly litigators, are infinitely wise. This is because we specialise in hindsight: “Why didn’t you do that?” ; “You should have done that”; “Why wasn’t that written down?” This is particularly acute in clinical negligence cases where one profession…
LIMITATION, THE CARE ACT, COUNTY COURT JURISDICTION AND DIFFICULT TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS.
In Nottinghamshire County Council v Belton, The Estate of & Anor [2017] EW Misc 26 (CC) His Honour Judge Godsmark QC considered an issue of jurisdiction and limitation in a claim being brought by a local authority to recover fees paid…
COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS SECTION 33 ORDER IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE
In The Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust v De Meza [2017] EWCA Civ 1711 the Court of Appeal overturned an order under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980. The trial judge found in favour of the claimant. This was held…
LEAVING ISSUE UNTIL THE LAST MOMENT – ALWAYS DANGEROUS : PARTICULARLY WHEN A CLAIMANT IS ON NOTICE OF POTENTIAL PROBLEMS
In Hall v Environment Agency [2017] EWHC 1309 (TCC) His Honour Judge Havelock-Allan QC pointed out the dangers of leaving issue until the last moment, particularly in cases where there were likely to be procedural issues relating to jurisdiction. THE CASE…
LIMITATION MYTHS 10: THE FINAL COUNTDOWN: 9 MYTHS BUSTED AND SOME HELPFUL POINTS
The idea of this series is to be a short, sharp “shock”, just to ensure key issues of limitation are lodged – somewhere – in the busy practitioner’s mind. Here, in the final post in the series, I try to…
TRAVEL LAW AND LIMITATION: AN UPDATE AND HELPFUL REMINDER
The aim of the series on limitation “myths” is to be succinct and point out dangers. This is only a starting point. Be aware of the dangers – but there can be exceptions. I am grateful to Julian Chamberlayne from…
SECTION 33 DISCRETION UPHELD ON APPEAL: DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS OF LIMITATION HEARING
In Mossa v Wise [2017] EWHC 2608 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip upheld a Master’s decision under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980. The Master’s decision that the defendant pay the costs of the issue of limitation was also upheld. THE…
LIMITATION MYTHS 9 (A): A BIT MORE ABOUT AVIATION, AIRPORTS AND HOT AIR BALLOONS: A POINT WORTH REPEATING
What has been interesting in the series on Myths and Limitation has been the response, mainly on Twitter. “That happened to me”, or “I sued someone who missed that point”. This even found its way into the “Halloween for Litigators”…
MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 8: THE LIMITATION PERIOD FOR A CHILD ALWAYS STARTS ON THEIR 18th BIRTHDAY
The previous posts on this subject set out examples where different limitation periods apply. It is worth noting that often these limitation period often apply to children. An assumption that a child’s limitation period always starts on their 18th birthday…
MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 7: A SECTION 33 APPLICATION REQUIRES AN “EXCEPTIONAL INDULGENCE” FROM THE COURT
I still come across arguments that a claimant seeking an order under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 requires an “exceptional indulgence” from the court. This is another myth that has an historical basis, but has been dispatched to…
MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 6: ABROAD IS A FOREIGN COUNTRY, THEY DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY THERE
It is now possible to bring actions in England and Wales for accidents that happened abroad. On the whole the Civil Procedure Rules apply. This has led to a myth that English and Welsh limitation periods also apply. In fact…
MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 5: EVERYTHING IS NEVER SHIP SHAPE IF YOU ASSUME A THREE YEAR PERIOD APPLIES
The previous post looked at the two year limitation period that applied in relation to air travel (and airports remember). Here we are going further to dispel the myth that every limitation period is two years. Be wary of anything…
MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 4: WHEN YOU REALLY BELIEVE THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD CAN FLY
The view that all personal injury claims are subject to a three year limitation period is a myth. If any injury is suffered within or near an aircraft the safest assumption is that the limitation period is two years. The…
MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 3: THE DATE OF ISSUE FOR LIMITATION IS THE DATE ON THE CLAIM FORM
Once or twice a month I receive a phone call from practitioners in a panic. They sent the claim form to court in good time but the date of issue is outside the limitation period. Further some defendants still take…
MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 2: THE LIMITATION PERIOD FOR ASSAULT IS SIX YEARS
This is a myth I didn’t know existed until I heard it being propounded in a bar last week (and which led to the start of this series). Strangely, unlike some of the myths were are looking at, it has…
MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 1: IN A BREACH OF CONTRACT CASE THE LIMITATION PERIOD IS ALWAYS SIX YEARS
This is the first of a series of short posts about “myths” about limitation that sometimes exist in litigation, in personal injury in particular. Myth 1 is that if you are bringing a claim based on breach of contract the…
A SHORT POINT ON CLAIMANTS WITHOUT CAPACITY AND LIMITATION: ONCE A LIMITATION PERIOD STARTS RUNNING IT NEVER STOPS
I was lecturing earlier this week on the issue of disability in personal injury cases. One of the principles of law I was lecturing on proved to be “controversial”, that is it appeared to come as a surprise to many…
LATE (BUT NOT VERY LATE) AMENDMENTS ALLOWED: LIMITATION DEFENCE WAS NOT “MUCKING AROUND AT THE LAST MOMENT”
In Vilca & Ors v XSTRATA Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 2096 (QB) Mr Justice Stuart Smith allowed a late, but not “very late” application by the defendant to allow it to plead limitation. “To my mind… all of the…
ACTION WAS STATUTE BARRED AND AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE COURT WILL NOT SIMPLY REFEREE WHATEVER GAME A CLAIMANT WANTS TO PLAY
In Schweppe -v- Closier [2017] EWHC 1486 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson struck out an action on the grounds it was statute barred and represented an abuse of process. The judgment is worth reading because it reviews the principles relating to…
THE PERILS OF LEAVING ISSUE TO THE LAST MINUTE: CLAIM AGAINST SOLICITORS WAS STATUTE BARRED – AMENDMENT DISALLOWED: ADDITION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTION
The judgment of the Court of Appeal yesterday in Godfrey Morgan Solicitors (a firm) -v- Armes [2017] EWCA Civ 323 illustrates the danger of late issue of proceedings. Issue was left until the last day. An additional defendant was added…
APPLICATIONS TO AMEND APPEAL NOTICE AND PARTICULARS AT A LATE STAGE NOT ALLOWED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
I am grateful to Jill Greenfield from Field Fisher for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal transcript in Howe -v- Motor Insurers Bureau (CA 8th February 2017). This is a judgment refusing permission to amend and for…
WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: ACTION BROUGHT IN TIME: COURT’S EARLIER REFUSAL TO EXTEND DISCRETION TO EXTEND TIME OVERTURNED
The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Otuo -v- Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Britain [2017] EWCA Civ 136 shows the importance of calculating time periods for limitation. It shows what a difference a day makes KEY POINTS…
EXTENSIONS OF TIME UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT: LATE APPLICATION REFUSED
In MLIA -v- The Chief Constable of Hampshire Police [2017] EWHC 292 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender refused the claimants’ applications for an extension of time to bring their actions under the Human Rights Act. THE CASE The claimants brought an…
SEXUAL ABUSE AND SECTION 33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS JUDGE’S ORDER
In Archbishop Michael George Bowen -v- JL [2017] EWCA Civ 82 the Court of Appeal overturned a judge’s decision under section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980. The judge had exercised the discretion in favour of the claimant. On appeal…
AMENDMENT PROVIDES A BRIDGE OVER TROUBLED WATERS: PERMISSION TO AMEND TO CLARIFY POSITION OF PARTY PERMITTED
Decisions on amendment and limitation arguments are cropping up at the moment. Here we look at the judgment of Master Kay QC in Highways England Company Limited -v- B.G. Rodwell Limited[2017] EWHC 118(QB). The defendant raised issues under Section 35…
A COUNTERCLAIM IS SUBJECT TO THE SAME RULES AS LIMITATION AS A CLAIM: SECTION 35 OF THE LIMITATION ACT CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
In the judgment today in Al-Rawas -v- Hassan Khan (A Firm) [2017] EWCA Civ 42 the Court of Appeal held that a counterclaim did not have any special status under the Limitation Act. It was subject to the same principles as…
LIMITATION, EXTENSIONS AND THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT: COURT OF APPEAL SAYS NO
For the second time within a week we have a case where the courts consider the discretion to extend time under s.7(5)(a) of the Human Rights Act 1998. In London Borough of Hackney -v- Williams [2017] EWCA Civ 26 the…
LIMITATION, DISABILITY AND THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT: COURT REFUSES TO EXTEND TIME: KEY DUTY ON LEGAL ADVISERS
In AP -v- Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council [2017] EWHC 65 (QB) Mr Justice King considered issues relating to limitation, disability and a claim under the Human Rights Act. KEY POINTS The fact that a party lacks capacity does not prevent…
LIMITATION; SEXUAL ABUSE AND THE SECTION 33 DISCRETION: NO SPECIAL RULE JUST BECAUSE THE DEFENDANT WAS MORALLY CULPABLE
In GH -v- The Catholic Child Welfare Society (Diocese of Middlesbrough) [2016] EWHC 3337 (QB) HH Judge Gosnell considered the exercise of the Section 33 discretion in a case where there was allegation of sexual abuse that took place in…
COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: ANOTHER CASE
There is a brief report on Browne Jacobson Insurance Law about a case that struck out because of a failure to pay the correct fees. THE REPORT The report is brief and does not give the date of the judgment…
LIMITATION AND DATE OF KNOWLEDGE: NO SPECIAL RULE BECAUSE THE CLAIMANT WAS A SOLICITOR
I am grateful to Thomas Jervis of Leigh Day for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Goss in Lewin -v- Glaxo Operations UK Limited [2016] EWHC 3331 (QB), an interesting decision in relation to limitation. (A…
PAYING THE INCORRECT COURT FEE: ANOTHER IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT
There have been several cases this year relating to the consequences that flow when a claimant pays the incorrect court fee. Several issues remain unresolved In a judgment this morning His Honour Judge Godsmark QC considered the position where the wrong…
UNDUE HARDSHIP AND THE FOREIGN LIMITATION PERIODS ACT
The Foreign Limitation Periods Act 1984 is one of those matters that litigators must always have at the forefront of their mind when dealing with any matter that has a foreign connection. The stringent nature of the Act is made…
LATE AMENDMENT OF PARTICULARS OF CLAIM NOT PERMITTED: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In a judgment today in Henderson -v- Dorset Healthcare University Foundation NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 3032 (QB) Mr Justice Warby refused a claimant’s application to amend the Particulars of Claim. The judgment covers a number of points. In particular it…
PAYING THE "CORRECT" COURT FEE AND AMENDMENT: AN IMPORTANT CASE REVIEWING THE PRINCIPLES
This blog has looked several times* at the cases and principles that have followed the decision in Lewis -v- Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch). Applications around allegations of failure to pay the correct court fee have become a new battleground…
FAILURE TO PAY THE CORRECT COURT FEE DOES NOT LEAD TO STRIKING OUT OF AN ACTION
The decision in Lewis -v- Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch) has led to considerable interest (and it has to be said) some hyperbole and opportunistic applications. The case is often misunderstood. In Bhatti -v- Ashghar [2016] EWHC 1049 (QB)…
MORE ABOUT SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: GOOD REASONS, DELAY AND A FAILURE TO PAY THE PROPER COURT FEES
In TMT Asia LImited -v- BHP Billiton Marketing AG [2016] EWHC 287 (Ch) Mr Justice Burton considered several issues relating to late service of the claim form and failure to pay the correct court fee. KEY POINTS The defendant’s application…
SECTION 33: CERTAIN FALLACIES DISPLACED
Each application under s.33 of the Limitation Act 1980 is, of course, unique. It is interesting, however to examine the decision of Her Honour Judge Walden Smith (sitting as a High Court judge) in Sanderson -v- City of Bradford City…
ORDERING A SPLIT TRIAL ON PRELIMINARY ISSUES: A CAUTIONARY TALE
In Larkfleet -v- Allison Homes Eastern Limited [2016] EWHC 195 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser made some important observations about the need for total clarity when a court orders the trial of a preliminary issue of law. ‘Preliminary points of law…
LIMITATION, PAIN AND ANGUISH: A GENTLE REMINDER ABOUT NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTIONS (1)
Most New Year’s resolutions last 24 days. In an effort to keep litigators on board for the whole of the year in relation to the Resolutions for Litigators for 2016 I am doing a series of short reminders about the…
THE DANGERS OF NOT PAYING THE CORRECT COURT FEE: CASES BARRED BY LIMITATION BECAUSE WRONG COURT FEE WAS PAID
In Richard Lewis & Others -v- Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch) Mr John Male QC summary judgment was given for the defendants on the grounds that a deliberate decision to pay an incorrect court fee on issue meant…
LIMITATION AND THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE: WHAT IS MEANT BY "SIGNIFICANT"?
In Summers -v- The City and County of Cardiff [2015] EWHC 3066 (QB) Mr Justice Hickinbottom considered what was meant by “significant” in s.14(1) of the Limitation Act 1980. “The test for “significance” of injury is one of quantum alone,…
LIMITATION :"STANDSTILL AGREEMENT" HAS WIDE SCOPE & COVERS CLAIM IN DECEIT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Mortgage Express -v- Countrywide Surveyors Limited [2015] EWCA Civ 1110 the Court of Appeal construed a limitation “standstill” agreement. It is, possibly, the first time a “standstill” agreement has been construed on appeal. Given that these agreements are now…
THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE AND SECTION 33: A CASE THAT CLINICAL AND PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYERS PROBABLY NEED TO READ
In Rayner -v- Wolferstans & Medway NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 2957 (QB) Mr Justice Wilkie carried out a comprehensive review of the law relating to date of knowledge and Section 33 of the Limitation Action 1980. It also touches…
You must be logged in to post a comment.