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…
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…
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…
RESTORING A COMPANY TO THE REGISTER, LIMITATION AND PROVING A CAUSAL LINK: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY
Litigators are sometimes called upon the restore limited companies to the register and make a limitation direction. The decision of the Court of Appeal today in Pickering -v- Davy [2016] EWCA Civ 30 gives rise to additional problems. It emphasises…
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…
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 LIMITATION: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES
One decision that has led to interlocutory skirmishing and opportunistic applications is Lewis v Ward Hadaway [2016] 4 WLR 6, [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch) and the consequences of failing to pay the correct court fee on issue. This has left many…
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)…
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…
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 ACCRUAL OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: A CLAIM "JUST" IN TIME
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
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…
SILENCE ON KEY ISSUES DOES NOT PROVE YOUR CASE: SQUARING UP TO WITNESS EVIDENCE
The judgment of Recorder Halpern QC in Canada Square Operations Ltd -v- Kinleigh Folkard & Hayward Limited (17/09/15)* is interesting for a number of reasons. Firstly on issues of limitation; secondly on the point that a court will not infer…
"HOW TO GET SUED, MAKE A LOSS AND BE MISERABLE": 22nd SEPTEMBER 2015: HARDWICKE BUILDING, LONDON: RAISING FUNDS FOR THE BILLABLE HOUR
LITIGATORS: HOW TO GET SUED: MAKE A LOSS AND BE MISERABLE RAISING MONEY FOR THE BILLABLE HOUR APPEAL (ALL PROCEEDS GO TO THE APPEAL) Gordon Exall and PJ Kirby QC. Hardwicke Building, Lincoln’s Inn. TUESDAY 22nd SEPTEMBER 2015 5.30 -…
DATE OF KNOWLEDGE AND SECTION 33 IN SEXUAL ABUSE CASES: A HIGH COURT DECISION
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…
FOR TWO DOLLARS MORE: THE DANGERS OF NOT SENDING THE CORRECT COURT FEE
I am grateful to Gerard McDermott QC for sending me details from the American Bar Association Journal of a £2.5 million case in Powhattan Circuit Court where a $2.5 million dollar action failed because the court fee was incorrect by…
ISSUING CONTRIBUTION PROCEEDINGS WITHIN THE LIMITATION PERIOD: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
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…
CAN A STRUCK OUT CLAIMANT ISSUE AGAIN? EXERCISE OF THE SECTION 33 DISCRETION AFTER A FIRST ACTION HAS BEEN DISMISSED.
One of the “open” questions following the Mitchell decision is whether a claimant refused relief from sanctions can issue again. That is an open question (which will be considered at another time). Here we look at the court’s approach to…
You must be logged in to post a comment.