header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
14 May 2009 / Simon Williams , Peter Crampin
Issue: 7369 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Discrimination
printer mail-detail

Lessons in without prejudice

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Peter Crampin QC & Simon Williams discuss the outcome & effect of Ofulue v Bossert

By its judgment in Ofulue v Bossert [2009] UKHL 16, [2009] All ER (D) 119 (Mar) the House of Lords has reaffirmed the public policy behind the “without prejudice” rule and made clear that, where an acknowledgment of title satisfying ss 29 and 30 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) is made in a statement of case, time runs from the date of, or the date of service of, the statement of case.

Their lordships had been invited to consider these two issues by Agnes Ofulue who, with her husband Emmanuel, had in September 2003 commenced proceedings against Erica Bossert for possession of a Victorian townhouse in London, of which they were the registered owners, on the grounds that she was a trespasser. They were met with the defence that their title had been extinguished by the adverse possession of Ms Bossert for more than 12 years pursuant to LA 1980, ss 15 and

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll