header-logo header-logo

24 July 2008 / Malcolm Keen
Issue: 7331 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

A matter of discretion

When is it equitable to allow a time-barred claim to proceed, asks Malcolm Keen

The House of Lords recently gave its judgment in Bowden v Poor Sisters of Nazareth and Others [2008] UKHL 32, a Scottish case concerning allegations of childhood abuse. The claim was time-barred under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 and the House upheld the Court of Session's decision not to disapply the limitation period. Bowden is relevant not only to civil claims arising from abuse many years ago but also to other personal injury cases where the defendant's alleged tort relates to circumstances long before proceedings were issued, such as occupational illness claims.

The claimants (pursuers) were former residents of a children's home run by the defendants (defenders). The first claimant, born in 1963, lived in the home between 1966 and 1979. She reached the age of majority (18) in January 1981. The second claimant, born in 1953, lived there between 1961 and 1969. She turned 18 in November 1971. Both claimants consulted solicitors soon after the publication of

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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