header-logo header-logo

A return to uncertainty

25 October 2013 / Tim Hirst
Issue: 7581 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail
171156032

The courts have muddied the water with their approach to limitation in professional liability cases, says Tim Hirst

The conflicting judicial approach to limitation in professional liability cases is revealed yet again in the Court of Appeal decision in Berney v Saul [2013] EWCA Civ 640.

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

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