header-logo header-logo

28 May 2010
Issue: 7419 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Limitation of action

Roberts v Gill & Co and others [2010] UKSC 22, [2010] All ER (D) 180 (May)

The claimant brought an action against a solicitor regarding allegedly negligent administration of an estate. On appeal the primary question issue was whether an amendment sought by the claimant to his action could be made notwithstanding expiry of the limitation period, pursuant to s 35 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) and CPR 19.5 in respect of his personal claim.
In particular, the main question was whether, in order to be able to carry on his claim, the claimant would need not only to alter the claim so that he was suing on behalf of the estate, but also to add the administrator as a defendant. If he did have to add the administrator, a further question arose as to what would have to be added at the time at which he altered his claim or whether he could do so later.

The Supreme Court ruled that CPR 19.5(2)(b) and 19.5(3)(b) (giving effect to s 35(5)(b) and 6(b) of LA

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis will mark the 80th anniversary of Shawcross and Beaumont on Air Law with a live podcast exploring the evolution of aviation law from the Chicago Convention to the challenges facing modern aerospace, taking place on Tuesday 29 September
Harmony Christian Ministries is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
Indemnity costs remain exceptional, but parties cannot ignore a case that deteriorates around them. In Lawrence v Associated Newspapers, Mr Justice Nicklin ordered the claimants to pay indemnity costs after finding their conduct, viewed cumulatively, fell ‘well outside the norm’
Public law is in flux following reversals and robust appellate intervention, according to the latest public law update by the team at HSFK for NLJ
Neurotechnology is turning the human mind into an operational domain, exposing gaps in the laws of war
back-to-top-scroll