Martin v Kaisary & Anor [2005] EWHC 531 (QB) (05 April 2005)

Martin v Kaisary & Anor [2005] EWHC 531 (QB) (05 April 2005)

The claimant did not have the requisite knowledge for limitation purposes until after 5 August 2001, as he believed until then that his injuries were caused by Heparin and not by negligent acts or omissions of the Trust's staff. Therefore, the claim against the Trust is not statute barred. Even if it were, the court would exercise its discretion under section 33 to allow the claim to proceed, as the delay was short, not attributable to the claimant personally, and the balance of prejudice favours the claimant.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 531 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Peter Francis Martin; First Defendant: Mr Amir Kaisary; Proposed Second Defendant: The Royal Free Hospital NHS Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury/medical Negligence / Preliminary Issue on Limitation and Application to Join Second Defendant
Outcome
Claimant's application to join the Trust as second defendant allowed; claim against the Trust not statute barred.
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Date of Knowledge, Section 33 Discretion, Joinder of Parties, Personal Injury
Tort Law Medical Negligence Civil Procedure Limitation of Actions Date of Knowledge Section 33 Discretion Joinder of Parties Personal Injury

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Francis Martin

Claimant

Mr Amir Kaisary

First Defendant

The Royal Free Hospital NHS Trust

Proposed Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury/medical Negligence / Preliminary Issue on Limitation and Application to Join Second Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim against the proposed Second Defendant is barred by the Limitation Act 1980, sections 11 and/or 14
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion under section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 to allow the action to proceed against the Trust

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant did not have the requisite knowledge for limitation purposes until after 5 August 2001, as he believed until then that his injuries were caused by Heparin and not by negligent acts or omissions of the Trust's staff. Therefore, the claim against the Trust is not statute barred. Even if it were, the court would exercise its discretion under section 33 to allow the claim to proceed, as the delay was short, not attributable to the claimant personally, and the balance of prejudice favours the claimant.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application to join the Trust as second defendant allowed; claim against the Trust not statute barred.

Orders

  • Claimant permitted to amend Particulars of Claim to add The Royal Free Hospital NHS Trust as second defendant.
  • Claim against the Trust to proceed.