The courts have muddied the water with their approach to limitation in professional liability cases, says Tim Hirst
This arose out of a mishandled personal injury (PI) claim arising out of a road traffic accident on 20 April 1999. The claim form was issued at the last gasp on 12 April 2002 and was directed to an incorrectly named defendant. The claim form was finally re-issued on 20 April 2002. No particulars of claim was served within the requisite four months (19 August 2002).
The defendants acknowledged service and admitted liability. They went further and gave an assurance that they would take no point arising out of the claimant’s delay.
New solicitors appointed by the claimant warned her on 2 June 2004 that her claim was vulnerable to an application to strike out. Ominously, the defendant in the PI claim withdrew its assurance on
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
