header-logo header-logo

Time pressure

25 October 2013 / Adrian Kwintner
Issue: 7581 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Limitation
printer mail-detail
istock_000005139948medium

Adrian Kwintner reviews the s 14A special time limit for negligence actions

Recent cases on the extended limitation period under s 14A of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) show that defendants, and their insurers, should carefully review the nature and extent of a claimant’s knowledge of the “material facts”. Cases could be summarily dismissed by arguing the claimant had the requisite knowledge earlier than alleged.

Limitation Act 1980

Primary limitation for negligence actions in tort is six years from accrual of the cause of action. Section 14A provides an additional time limit for actions not involving personal injury. It applies where the claimant does not have knowledge of all the material facts at the date his cause of action accrues. The limitation period can then be extended to three years from the earliest date when the claimant had the knowledge required for bringing an action and a right to bring an action.

Necessity versus conviction

The High Court case of Roger Ward Associates Ltd v Britannia Assets (UK) Ltd [2013] EWHC 1653

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

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

Kate Gaskell, CEO of Flex Legal, reflects on chasing her childhood dreams underscores the importance of welcoming those from all backgrounds into the profession

Dorsey & Whitney—Jonathan Christy

Dorsey & Whitney—Jonathan Christy

Dispute resolution team welcomes associate in London

Winckworth Sherwood—Kevin McManamon

Winckworth Sherwood—Kevin McManamon

Special education needs and mental capacity expert joins as partner

NEWS
Overcrowded prisons, mental health hospitals and immigration centres are failing to meet international and domestic human rights standards, the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) has warned
Two speedier and more streamlined qualification routes have been launched for probate and conveyancing professionals
Workplace stress was a contributing factor in almost one in eight cases before the employment tribunal last year, indicating its endemic grip on the UK workplace
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll