header-logo header-logo

07 March 2025 / Richard Scorer
Issue: 8107 / Categories: Opinion , Child law , Abuse , Limitation
printer mail-detail

Justice without limits

210373
Righting wrongs: Richard Scorer welcomes the removal of time limits on civil claims for child sexual abuse

The government’s announcement that it will implement the recommendation by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) to remove the three-year primary limitation period for claims arising from child sexual abuse has been welcomed by abuse survivors. Once legislation is passed, there will be no time limit for civil claims. A defendant will still be able to secure a stay of proceedings if it can satisfy the court that a fair trial is impossible—but the burden of persuading the court will rest on the defendant.

This is a long overdue change. As claimant lawyers argued in evidence to IICSA, limitation has been a significant obstacle to civil justice for those who suffered non-recent child abuse. The gap in time between the abuse of a child, and the child’s disclosure of that abuse—which frequently occurs when the child is well into adulthood—can often be several decades. Claims are often brought many years after the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll