‘On 15th October 2014, the Court of Appeal had cause to review the manner in which a claimant might find a claim statute barred by reason of constructive knowledge.’
Zenith PI Blog, 5th November 2014
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘Lord Justice Jackson has called on the government to create a “single core limitation regime” for all claims in contract and tort, as recommended by the Law Commission.’
Litigation Futures, 4th November 2014
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘How much knowledge does a potential claimant need before time begins to run against a competition claim against a party alleged to have breached competition law? This was the key question addressed by Mr Justice Simon in the first case in which an English Court has had to consider the effect of s.32 of the Limitation Act 1980 (“LA”) in the context of a competition claim.’
Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 31st October 2014
Source: www.competitionbulletin.com
‘A recent case provides clarification and guidance on the issue of service by the courts in contravention of the claimant’s instructions.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 27th October 2014
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Would an action against employers who were unidentifiable at the time of an initial claim against 8 other employers in 2003 succeed where it was argued that such proceedings were an abuse of process of the court, that there was cause of action estoppel and where the claim was statute barred and required an application under s 33 Limitation Act 1980?’
Zenith PI Blog, 21st October 2014
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘Most construction professionals will be familiar with net contribution clauses (NCCs) in consultants’ appointments and collateral warranties but their use should not necessarily be limited to the construction sector. They may be useful in any project where professionals from a multiplicity of disciplines are retained.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 19th September 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘As every student of equity knows well, a trust is a type of property ownership in which one or more people (the trustee(s)) hold property on behalf of one or more other people (the beneficiary/ies), exercise all the powers of an owner of property in relation to third parties, but are bound to do so for the exclusive interests of the beneficiaries. A trust can be express, made by a formal written implement, or implied, either by transfer of property without explanation (a resulting trust) or in circumstances where the common intention of the parties is or is deemed to be for the property to be held on trust (a constructive trust). Both express and implied trusts are genuine trusts: the property is owned by the trustee, subject to the interest of the beneficiaries.’
The Barristers’ Hub, 1st August 2014
Source: www.barristershub.co.uk
Supreme Court, 30th July 2014
Ballinger and another v Mercer Ltd and another; [2014] EWCA Civ 996; [2014] WLR (D) 335
‘Where a claimant applied to introduce a new claim by amendment under CPR r 17.4, and the defendant could show a prima facie defence of limitation, the burden was on the claimant to show that the defence was not reasonably arguable. Amendments seeking to add or substitute a new cause of action would only be permitted if they arose out of the same or substantially the same facts as were already in issue on the existing claims.’
WLR Daily, 17th July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Where a claim of race discrimination had been dismissed on limitation grounds those allegations could not be repeated in a second claim together with additional allegations which could have been included in the first claim but had not been, in order to avoid the limitation defence by founding a claim based on conduct extending over a period of time. The second claim was an abuse of process.’
WLR Daily, 24th June 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Dawson v Thomson Airways Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 845; [2014] WLR (D) 279
‘The limitation period applicable to a claim brought in England for compensation for cancellation or delay under articles 5 and 7 of Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 was the six-year period prescribed by section 9 of the Limitation Act 1980.’
WLR Daily, 19th June 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The aviation industry has suffered another court defeat after an appeal judge ruled claims can be made up to six years after a flight delay.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 20th June 2014
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Corporate bodies (limited companies or LLPs) have a separate legal identity that ceases to exist upon dissolution. Dissolution can occur, broadly speaking, in two ways, one is at the end of the process of winding up (whether voluntary or compulsory) and the other is by the process of striking off the Register of Companies or limited liability partnerships. The latter occurs either as a result of the company’s or LLP’s failure to file accounts, returns etc. or by a process of voluntary striking off.’
Full story (PDF)
Thirty Nine Essex Street, 7th March 2014
Source: www.39essex.com
‘In Chandra & ors v Brooke North [2013] EWCA Civ 1559 the Court of Appeal gives practitioners and courts useful guidance about the correct approach to applications to amend introducing new claims outside limitation periods. The history of the case is a demonstration of the procedural knots and costly consequences for the parties that can be created when the lower courts go further than they should.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 13th March 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
Kairos Shipping Ltd and another v Enka & Co LLC and others: [2014] EWCA Civ 217; [2014] WLR (D) 113
‘It is in principle possible to constitute a limitation fund under the International Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims 1976, scheduled to the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, by means of a guarantee in the form of a letter of undertaking provided by a protection and indemnity club.’
WLR Daily, 6th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘As many will be aware, the recent RBS swaps cases have thrown up interesting issues, including the proper characterization of legal duties owed by banks and other regulated firms, standard form limitation/exclusion terms, and Limitation Act problems. These issues are further complicated by the LIBOR manipulation points raised in Graisely Properties v Barclays.’
No. 5 Chambers, 24th February 2014
Source: www.no5.com
Williams (Respondent) v Central Bank of Nigeria (Appellant) [2014] UKSC 10 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 19th February 2014
‘On 11th December 2013 the Court of Appeal gave judgment in Davidson v Aegis [2013] EWCA Civ 1586. The case provides a useful and up to date reminder of the applicable principles when a Court is asked to use section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 to disapply the primary limitation period in a personal injuries action.’
Zenith Chambers, 5th February 2014
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
‘Until recently it was unclear how long a party who lost in an adjudication, and had to pay money to the winning party, had to bring a subsequent claim for recovery of those monies. The position has recently been resolved by the Court of Appeal in the case of Aspect Contracts (Asbestos) Ltd v Higgins Construction Plc [2013] EWCA Civ 1541 but the discussion had started earlier with the case of Jim Ennis Construction Ltd v Premier Asphalt Ltd [2009] EWHC 1906 (TCC).’
Hardwicke Chambers, 15th January 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘In ancillary relief proceedings, the largest assets are frequently the divorcing couple’s matrimonial home and pension rights. Whilst it is usually straightforward to ascertain the value of the former, accurately achieving this for the latter can be a highly technical exercise. Solicitors’ alleged failure to analyse pension transfer values is the subject of a spate of negligence claims currently being brought by former clients. No case is yet to be reported, but it is expected that a number will be during 2014.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 13th January 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025