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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll