Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

IOSH Forums are closing 

The IOSH Forums will close on 5 January 2026 as part of a move to a new, more secure online community platform.

All IOSH members will be invited to join the new platform following the launch of a new member database in the New Year. You can continue to access this website until the closure date. 

For more information, please visit the IOSH website.

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error
Will the time barred rule for all civil claims change following yesterdays decision?
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Previous Topic Next Topic
Admin  
#1 Posted : 31 January 2008 09:01:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By Paul L Williams
A question for the legal practitioners amongst us.

Yesterday a decision was made by five Law Lords who have now ruled that "Mrs A" can seek to claim compensation which will allow her to go back to the High Court for permission to sue Hoare, 59, who was jailed for life in 1989 for the attempted rape and for attacks on six other women 16 years after the event.

My question is will this decision affect the time barred rule for all civil claims in the future or will it be based around rape cases?

Presently the three year deadline begins from the date of the accident or knowledge, which is particularly useful in cases involving exposure hazardous substances.

Thanks for your help in advance.

Paul
Back to top
Admin  
#2 Posted : 31 January 2008 09:11:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By Tabs
No.

The clause has always existed, and is sometimes used (for example when the law firm messes up and the case is delayed through no fault of the claimant).

The Court has always had the option to allow a case to be heard if the judge believes it is right to do so.

Personally, as long as the damage continues to exist, I think you should be able to sue. The same if new evidence appears - imagine a 20 year old case, not convicted so a civil case did not succeed ... then DNA evidence is tried and the offender is now proven guilty.

Should the victim be allowed to sue or not?

Of course so.

But for slips and trips, I doubt they will be tempted to allow claims beyond the 3 year limitation still.
Back to top
Admin  
#3 Posted : 31 January 2008 11:46:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By Raymond Rapp
Paul

Agree with Tabs. It is my understanding that this policy change by the Law Lords only applies at present to victims of abuse pursuant to 1980 Limitations Act. However, there could be implications for other types of cases that could be construed as abuse.

Regards

Ray
Back to top
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2026, Yet Another Forum.NET