header-logo header-logo

05 January 2018 / Simon Anderson
Issue: 7775 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Personal injury , Limitation
printer mail-detail

No time to waste

nlj_7775_anderson

Simon Anderson discusses the elastic limitation period post-Carroll

  • A defendant cannot sit on its laurels and argue that it has been prejudiced by the mere fact of the expiry of the primary limitation period in personal injury claims.

The claimant was a serving police officer involved in covert drug operations that required him to undertake test purchases of heroin. His case centred on an allegation that he was exposed to the drug in circumstances that led to him become addicted and subsequently develop a serious depressive disorder. Limitation was tried as a preliminary issue and the claimant succeeded as a litigant in person. The defendant appealed.

On appeal to the Court of Appeal the claimant accepted that the trial judge had erred by taking into account the consequences of disclosing his addiction to his employer as part of the s 14 enquiry; indeed, he must have appreciated that he was addicted when consulting the Lifeline drugs charity more than four years before his claim was brought. It was therefore between a year and 18 months out of time. However,

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll