header-logo header-logo

Limitation of action

13 June 2014
Issue: 7610 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Collins v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills and another [2014] EWCA Civ 717, [2014] All ER (D) 44 (Jun)

Sections 11 to 14 of the Limitation Act 1980 struck a balance between the interests of: (i) persons who, having suffered latent injuries, sought compensation late in the day; and (ii) tortfeasors who, despite their wrongdoings, ultimately needed closure. Parliament had struck that balance by means of an objective test. 

In the light of the established authorities, s 33(3) of the Act was to be construed in the following manner. First, the period of time which elapsed between a tortfeasor’s breach of duty and the commencement of the limitation period had to be part of “the circumstances of the case” within the meaning of s 33(3). Second, the primary factors to which the court had to have regard were those set out in s 33(3)(a) to (f). Third, although the court would have regard to time elapsed before the claimant’s date of knowledge, the court would accord less weight to that factor. It would

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll