header-logo header-logo

06 March 2008 / Malcolm Keen
Issue: 7311 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Know your limits

Malcolm Keen examines how a recent House of Lords ruling has affected occupational illness litigation

On 30 January 2008 the House of Lords announced its decisions in A v Hoare and other appeals [2008] UKHL 6, [2008] All ER (D) 251 (Jan)— appeals arising out of allegations of sexual assault and abuse. The cases concerned two main issues:

 

the appropriate limitation period in claims for intentionally caused personal injury; and

the test to determine date of knowledge where a claim is brought more than three years after the cause of action has accrued.

 

On the first issue, their lordships unanimously held that such claims are not subject to the non-extendable six-year limitation period (running from the date the cause of action accrued) under the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), s 2. Instead, claims for intentional personal injury are covered by LA 1980, ss 11 and 14.

 

DATE OF KNOWLEDGE

It is the second issue which is of particular significance in occupational illness litigation.

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

Winckworth Sherwood—David Fendt

Winckworth Sherwood—David Fendt

Restructuring and insolvency practice strengthened by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Billy Poulter & Shay Moore

Gateley Legal—Billy Poulter & Shay Moore

North West residential development team welcomes partner and associate

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Family law boutique expands London team with legal director hire

NEWS
Some employment law controversies never disappear—they merely lie dormant
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming legal practice, but its successful adoption depends as much on culture as technology
The fallout from Lord Mandelson’s appointment and dismissal as UK ambassador to Washington raises profound questions about constitutional governance, accountability and political appointments
Pastries may be in the firing line while kebabs escape scrutiny, but the reality is far more nuanced
The Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon highlights a central tension in modern public law: rights may be recognised without being fully realised
back-to-top-scroll