Leeson v Marsden & Anor [2008] EWHC 1011 (QB) (13 May 2008)

Leeson v Marsden & Anor [2008] EWHC 1011 (QB) (13 May 2008)

The court holds that following Horton v Sadler, section 33 Limitation Act 1980 allows the court to exercise discretion to permit a second action brought out of time, unless the second action constitutes an abuse of process. Abuse of process is not established merely because a first action was struck out; substantial use of court resources in the first action may be relevant but does not automatically bar the second action. The Claimant's conduct and the circumstances justify the exercise of discretion under section 33, and the claim is permitted to proceed.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 1011
Parties
Claimant: Susan Leeson; First Defendant: Rachael Marsden; Second Defendant: United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Clinical Negligence / Trial of Preliminary Issues: Limitation and Abuse of Process
Outcome
Claim permitted to proceed; limitation period disapplied under section 33; abuse of process argument rejected.
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Abuse of Process, Section 33 Limitation Act 1980, Clinical Negligence, Professional Negligence
Tort Law Medical Negligence Civil Procedure Limitation of Actions Abuse of Process Section 33 Limitation Act 1980 Clinical Negligence Professional Negligence

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Susan Leeson

Claimant

Rachael Marsden

First Defendant

United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Clinical Negligence / Trial of Preliminary Issues: Limitation and Abuse of Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should exercise discretion under section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 to disapply the limitation period and permit the claim to proceed
  2. 2 Whether the second action constitutes an abuse of process and should be struck out

Ratio Decidendi

The court holds that following Horton v Sadler, section 33 Limitation Act 1980 allows the court to exercise discretion to permit a second action brought out of time, unless the second action constitutes an abuse of process. Abuse of process is not established merely because a first action was struck out; substantial use of court resources in the first action may be relevant but does not automatically bar the second action. The Claimant's conduct and the circumstances justify the exercise of discretion under section 33, and the claim is permitted to proceed.

Court Disposition

Claim permitted to proceed; limitation period disapplied under section 33; abuse of process argument rejected.

Orders

  • Section 33 Limitation Act 1980 applied to disapply limitation period.
  • Claim not struck out as abuse of process.