header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
09 March 2007 / Colin Moore , Paula Jefferson
Issue: 7263 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Time for a change

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Paula Jefferson and Colin Moore uncover some of the limitations of the Limitation Act 1980

It has long been appreciated that a claimant should not have an indefinite period in which to bring a civil claim. Memories will fade and evidence will be lost until it becomes inequitable, if not impossible, for a fair trial to proceed. It is also undesirable for potential defendants, and their insurers to remain in limbo, anticipating claims. These factors were among the precursors to the legislative framework, enacted in the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), which prescribes the time limits for claimants to issue proceedings in civil claims.

Negligence, nuisance and breach of statutory duty

For personal injury claims arising from negligence, nuisance or breach of statutory duty, s 11 of LA 1980 sets a three-year time limit from the claimant’s ‘date of knowledge’ in which to issue proceedings. Date of know­ledge is defined as the date on which the claimant first knew:

  • that the injury was significant;
  • that the injury was caused by an
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

Read All
Sponsored by
NLJ Career Profile: Ling Ong, London Market FOIL

NLJ Career Profile: Ling Ong, London Market FOIL

Ling Ong, partner at Weightmans and president of London Market FOIL, discusses her biggest inspirations, the challenges of AI and the importance of tackling unconscious bias

DWF—Imogen Francis

DWF—Imogen Francis

Director and head of IP team joins in Birmingham

Penningtons Manches Cooper—five promotions

Penningtons Manches Cooper—five promotions

Firm boosts partnership and costs practice with five senior promotions

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll