Griffin & Ors v Clwyd Health Authority & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 818 (14 May 2001)

Griffin & Ors v Clwyd Health Authority & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 818 (14 May 2001)

The claimants had a firm belief their injuries were attributable to their employment as early as 1991, constituting knowledge under section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980; their claims are statute barred and no adequate explanation was provided for delay to justify exercise of discretion under section 33.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 818
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Annette Griffin; Claimant/appellant: Barbara Lawson; Claimant/appellant: Jennifer Williams; Defendant/respondent: Clwyd Health Authority; Defendant/respondent: Peter Cox Environmental Services Limited; Defendant/respondent: Verminex Limited; Defendant/respondent: Teifi Limited; Defendant/respondent: Action Pest Control Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Preliminary Limitation Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Date of Knowledge, Section 33 Discretion, Procedural Fairness
Personal Injury Civil Procedure Limitation of Actions Date of Knowledge Section 33 Discretion Procedural Fairness

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Annette Griffin

Claimant/appellant

Barbara Lawson

Claimant/appellant

Jennifer Williams

Claimant/appellant

Clwyd Health Authority

Defendant/respondent

Peter Cox Environmental Services Limited

Defendant/respondent

Verminex Limited

Defendant/respondent

Teifi Limited

Defendant/respondent

Action Pest Control Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Preliminary Limitation Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' claims are statute barred under the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise discretion under section 33 to disapply the limitation period
  3. 3 Whether the procedure adopted at the preliminary hearing was unfair

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants had a firm belief their injuries were attributable to their employment as early as 1991, constituting knowledge under section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980; their claims are statute barred and no adequate explanation was provided for delay to justify exercise of discretion under section 33.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Detailed assessment of appellant's assisted costs