Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Limitation Act 1980
LIMITATION: SECTION 33 CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A CLAIM FOR SEXUAL ABUSE: DISCRETION EXERCISED WHEN PROCEEDINGS ISSUED 15 YEARS OUTSIDE THE LIMITATION PERIOD

LIMITATION: SECTION 33 CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A CLAIM FOR SEXUAL ABUSE: DISCRETION EXERCISED WHEN PROCEEDINGS ISSUED 15 YEARS OUTSIDE THE LIMITATION PERIOD

May 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury, Uncategorized

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…

LIMITATION:  THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD AND THE USE OF SECTION 33 IN AN EXTREMELY SENSITIVE CASE

LIMITATION: THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD AND THE USE OF SECTION 33 IN AN EXTREMELY SENSITIVE CASE

January 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Limitation, Members Content

I have to admit I have hesitated before writing about the judgment of Mrs Justice Yip in Young v Downey [2019] EWHC 3508 (QB), it is an extremely sensitive case that has already been widely reported. However that part of…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2: HOW DO YOU MISS THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2: HOW DO YOU MISS THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?

July 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

This series looks at avoiding negligence claims in litigation, personal injury litigation in particular.  The easiest (and most common) method of a negligence claim is missing the limitation period. How does anyone miss a three year limitation period?  The basic…

LIMITATION: SECTION 33 APPLICATION SUCCESSFUL  - 38 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT COMPLAINED OF

LIMITATION: SECTION 33 APPLICATION SUCCESSFUL – 38 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT COMPLAINED OF

June 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Limitation, Members Content

In FZO v Adams & Anor [2018] EWHC 3584 (QB) Mrs Justice Cutts exercised the Section 33 discretion in a case brought 25 – 30 years after the expiry of the applicable limitation period and where the events happened 38…

AN UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPT TO APPEAL  JUDGE'S EXERCISE OF DISCRETION  UNDER S.33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980 IN FAVOUR OF THE CLAIMANT

AN UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPT TO APPEAL JUDGE’S EXERCISE OF DISCRETION UNDER S.33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980 IN FAVOUR OF THE CLAIMANT

April 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content

In HMG3 Ltd & Anor v Dunn [2019] EWHC 882 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip upheld the findings of a Circuit Judge who exercised their discretion under Section 33 in favour of a claimant. THE CASE The claim is brought by…

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 25: FATAL ACCIDENT ACT LIMITATION PERIODS AND CHILDREN

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 25: FATAL ACCIDENT ACT LIMITATION PERIODS AND CHILDREN

January 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Courses, Fatal Accidents, Limitation, Members Content

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…

SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE: LIMITATION,  SECTION 33 AND DENTON: CARDS ON THE TABLE PLEASE - THIS IS THE CPR

SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE: LIMITATION, SECTION 33 AND DENTON: CARDS ON THE TABLE PLEASE – THIS IS THE CPR

July 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Skeleton arguments, Written advocacy

In TPE v Franks [2018] EWHC 1765 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles set aside a default judgment.  The case contains some important observations as to how the courts should consider an application to set aside a default judgment – considering…

LIMITATION PERIOD RUNS FROM DATE OF COMPLETION OF WORK: AGREED TERMS FOR PAYMENT DO NOT EXTEND LIMITATION PERIOD

LIMITATION PERIOD RUNS FROM DATE OF COMPLETION OF WORK: AGREED TERMS FOR PAYMENT DO NOT EXTEND LIMITATION PERIOD

February 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content

In  Ice Architects Ltd v Empowering People Inspiring Communities (Rev 1) [2018] EWHC 281 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert found that the six year contractual limitation period ran from the date of completion of work and not the date of invoice.   A…

SECTION 33 IN AN INDUSTRIAL DEAFNESS CASE: COURT OF APPEAL SAYS NO

SECTION 33 IN AN INDUSTRIAL DEAFNESS CASE: COURT OF APPEAL SAYS NO

February 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Limitation, Members Content

We are looking again at the decision in  Carr v Panel Products (Kimpton) Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 190     This was the first time the Court of Appeal had considered Section 33 of the Limitation Act since the decision in Carroll v Chief…

A SHORT POINT ON CLAIMANTS WITHOUT CAPACITY AND LIMITATION: ONCE A LIMITATION PERIOD STARTS RUNNING IT NEVER STOPS

A SHORT POINT ON CLAIMANTS WITHOUT CAPACITY AND LIMITATION: ONCE A LIMITATION PERIOD STARTS RUNNING IT NEVER STOPS

October 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content

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…

SEXUAL ABUSE AND SECTION 33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS JUDGE’S ORDER

February 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content

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

AMENDMENT PROVIDES A BRIDGE OVER TROUBLED WATERS: PERMISSION TO AMEND TO CLARIFY POSITION OF PARTY PERMITTED

February 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Amendment, Limitation, Members Content, Statements of Case

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…

LIMITATION; SEXUAL ABUSE AND THE SECTION 33 DISCRETION: NO SPECIAL RULE JUST BECAUSE THE DEFENDANT WAS MORALLY CULPABLE

January 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content

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…

LIMITATION AND DATE OF KNOWLEDGE: NO SPECIAL RULE BECAUSE THE CLAIMANT WAS A SOLICITOR

December 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury, Uncategorized

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…

SECTION 33: CERTAIN FALLACIES DISPLACED

March 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

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…

LIMITATION :"STANDSTILL AGREEMENT" HAS WIDE SCOPE & COVERS CLAIM IN DECEIT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

October 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

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

October 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

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…

THE ACCRUAL OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: A CLAIM "JUST" IN TIME

October 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

The previous post looked at the decision in relation to interest in Oyesanya -v- Mid-Yorkshire Hospital Trust [2015] EWCA Civ 1049. Here we look at the procedural points. “I cannot leave this case without making three observations. First, I am surprised…

THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE LIMITATION ACT: DELAY WHEN APPLYING TO SET JUDGMENT ASIDE

October 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Judgment, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Blakemores LDP -v- Scott [2015] EWCA Civ 999 the Court of Appeal considered issues relating to date of knowledge for the purpose of  s.14A of the Limitation Act 1980 . The court also considered the impact of delay when…

DATE OF KNOWLEDGE AND SECTION 33 IN SEXUAL ABUSE CASES: A HIGH COURT DECISION

June 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content

In A -v- The Trustees of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society [2015] EWHC 1722 (QB) Mr Justice Globe considered the issue of the date of knowledge under s.14 of the Limitation Act 1980 and also stated that, had it…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS: A SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS POSTS

January 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury, Useful links

There are now over 640 individual posts on this blog. Occasionally it helps to recap. Here I provide links to the series on “avoiding negligence” claims written at the end of 2013. THE SERIES The series was primarily aimed at…

LIMITATION, PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT: AN IMPORTANT LESSON

December 15, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Witness statements

The case of Seton House Group -v- Mercer Ltd [2014] EWHC 4234 (Ch) shows the importance of being certain of a limitation period and issuing well before that date. In this case, however, the limitation period had passed well before the…

ISSUING CONTRIBUTION PROCEEDINGS WITHIN THE LIMITATION PERIOD: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

December 1, 2014 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content

A party  has two years to bring a claim for a contribution under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978. In The Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary -v- Southampton City Council [2014] EWCA Civ 1541 the Court of Appeal found that…

LIMITATION: DELIBERATE CONCEALMENT BY THE DEFENDANT EXTENDS THE LIMITATION PERIOD

November 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content

In IT Human Resources PLC -v- Land [2014] EWHC3812 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan considered when the limitation period started when there had been concealment by a defendant. It is an important example of s.32 of the Limitation Act 1980 in…

LIMITATION & THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF HEARING LOSS

November 3, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Platt -v- BRB Residuary Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1401 the Court of Appeal considered issues relating to the date of knowledge in the context of a claim for hearing loss. THE LAW The relevant sections of the 1980 Act…

SECTION 14A OF THE LIMITATION ACT: DON'T RELY ON s.14A BEING A GOOD INVESTMENT

October 30, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content

In Susan Jacobs -v- Sesame Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1410 the Court of Appeal held that the claimant could not take advantage of s.14A of the Limitation Act 1980.  The date of knowledge was much earlier than that found by…

LIMITATION IN A BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIM: DATE OF ACCRUAL; LATENT DAMAGE AND AMENDING UNDER CPR 17.4.(2): A CASE IN POINT

September 14, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Interface Europe Ltd -v- Premier Hanks Dyers Ltd [2014] EWHC 2610 (QB) Judge Saffman (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered the issue of the relevant date of accrual of a cause of action in a breach…

AMENDING PLEADINGS: HAS THE LIMITATION PERIOD EXPIRED? WHERE DOES THE BURDEN OF PROOF LIE?

July 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Statements of Case

The Court of Appeal decision today in Mercer -v- Ballinger [2014] EWCA Civ 996 may appear to be an issue of esoteric civil procedure.  However the decision is an important one with far-ranging  practical consequences for a party seeking to…

SECTION 33 AND “LONG TAIL CLAIMS”: CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE AND RELEVANCE OF DELAY BETWEEN THE BREACH AND THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE

May 28, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content

In Collins -v- Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 717  the Court of Appeal considered the appropriate legal test  for the date of knowledge and exercise of the section 33 discretion when an…

LIMITATION: THE ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST: BACK TO THE FUTURE AT WORK

May 26, 2014 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content

This is the second “essential checklist” compiled at a recent course held by Zenith Chambers.   In this workshop practitioners (primarily solicitors), of all levels and type of experience, were asked to produce checklists for the “danger” areas of practice….

LIMITATION: ESSENTIAL POINTS BEFORE THE "ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST"

May 25, 2014 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content

We have already had the essential checklist on service. We are now moving on to the essential checklist for limitation.  Before the Mitchell case it was usually limitation that was a major problem for litigators, particularly personal injury practitioners.  It…

TEN LIMITATION MYTHS THAT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER SHOULD KNOW

February 28, 2014 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

I am giving a webinar for CLT on the 4th March. Booking details can be found here “Limitation and PI Claims: 10 Myths that Every Practitioner Should Know” This webinar identifies and debunks 10 of the most common myths and…

CIVIL PROCEDURE AND THE SECRET STATE: HOW FAR CAN IT GO?

February 25, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content

Yesterday I wrote of problems when the court was refusing to issue proceedings alleging (wrongly) that they were statute barred.  It is becoming frightening that important issues of law are being made (or purportedly made) by administrators.  This led to…

TROUBLES WITH THE COURT: REFUSING TO ISSUE AND STRIKING OUT BECAUSE OF ALLEGED LIMITATION ISSUES: MORE EXAMPLES AND CASE LAW THAT MAY HELP

February 24, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

Hot on the heels of the complaint about the court wrongfully striking out an action came another, remarkable story about the court refusing to issue proceedings because of alleged limitation issues. THE REMARKABLE STORY Here it is in its original…

CIVIL PROCEDURE, COSTS & SANCTIONS: LINKS TO  RECENT ARTICLES AND POST

CIVIL PROCEDURE, COSTS & SANCTIONS: LINKS TO RECENT ARTICLES AND POST

December 27, 2013 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Useful links

Links to posts and articles on all aspects of  civil procedure. Linking does not indicate approval or agreement but that all discussion on these issues is useful.   RECENT POSTS AND ARTICLES 23rd June 2019 Herbert Smith Freehills Litigation Notes…

ISSUING PROCEEDINGS A SECOND TIME: NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: HALL –v- MINISTRY OF DEFENCE EXAMINED

December 27, 2013 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Can a claimant issue again if an action is struck because of a  failure to comply with the rules and? This is likely to become a question of considerable interest given the number of cases that are failing because of…

THE DANGERS OF GETTING THE COURT FEES WRONG: IF THE FEES ARE NOT RIGHT – YOU HAVEN'T ISSUED

October 21, 2013 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content

If proceedings are being issued at the last moment then it is imperative that the correct fee is lodged at court. A failure to send the correct fee will mean that proceedings are not properly issued.  This post looks at…

TEN MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION THAT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATOR SHOULD KNOW.

October 20, 2013 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Risks of litigation

There are a surprising number of “myths” that prevail in personal injury litigation. In particular in relation to limitation. Here, as part of the “avoiding negligence” series we look at 10 of these myths. Myth 1:  In a breach of…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: TIME LIMITS FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITORS’ BILLS
  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..
  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • COST BITES 375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: “VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL”
  • MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”

Top Posts

  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: TIME LIMITS FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITORS' BILLS
  • SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF DELAY AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
  • JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES IN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 2: THE PRINCIPLES (AND THE COSTS!)
  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 59: UNQUALIFIED PERSON NOT ALLOWED TO REPRESENT PARKING COMPANY AT A SMALL CLAIMS HEARING

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.