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

Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Chair of the Association of Pension Lawyers joins as partner

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Group names Shakespeare Martineau partner head of Sheffield office

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Four legal directors promoted to partner across UK offices

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll