header-logo header-logo

05 January 2018 / Simon Anderson
Issue: 7775 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Personal injury , Limitation
printer mail-detail

No time to waste

nlj_7775_anderson

Simon Anderson discusses the elastic limitation period post-Carroll

  • A defendant cannot sit on its laurels and argue that it has been prejudiced by the mere fact of the expiry of the primary limitation period in personal injury claims.

The claimant was a serving police officer involved in covert drug operations that required him to undertake test purchases of heroin. His case centred on an allegation that he was exposed to the drug in circumstances that led to him become addicted and subsequently develop a serious depressive disorder. Limitation was tried as a preliminary issue and the claimant succeeded as a litigant in person. The defendant appealed.

On appeal to the Court of Appeal the claimant accepted that the trial judge had erred by taking into account the consequences of disclosing his addiction to his employer as part of the s 14 enquiry; indeed, he must have appreciated that he was addicted when consulting the Lifeline drugs charity more than four years before his claim was brought. It was therefore between

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll