header-logo header-logo

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

A return to uncertainty

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 25 January 2005. In consequence, the claim was compromised at

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll