header-logo header-logo

18 September 2008 / Daniel Preddy , Simon Thomas
Issue: 7337 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Shore timings

Delays to the start of the primary limitation period will continue to be rare, say Daniel Preddy and Simon Thomas

The recent Court of Appeal case of Shore v Sedgwick Financial Services Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 863 , [2008] All ER (D) 304 (Jul) clarifies the date on which a claimant's cause of action arises in negligence under the primary limitation period (Limitation Act 1980, s 2). This is crucial to understanding whether any such claim is time-barred.

Section 2 provides that “an action founded on tort shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued”. A claim in negligence accrues when the claimant suffers damage. However, this raises the often problematic question of when that first occurs.

Shore, together with the recent Court of Appeal decision in Watkins v Jones Maidment Wilson [2008] EWCA Civ 134, [2008] All ER (D) 27 (Mar) confirms that claimants will only be able to delay the start of the primary limitation period in rare circumstances,

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll