Malone v Relyon Heating Engineering Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 904 (02 July 2014)

Malone v Relyon Heating Engineering Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 904 (02 July 2014)

The judge erred by treating hearing loss as an indivisible injury and applying a single limitation period; the claim should have been divided into pre-2001 and post-2001 injuries, with separate consideration of prejudice and delay. The prejudice to the defendant from delay outweighed the claimant's interests, making it inequitable to disapply the limitation period for either period.

Citation
[2014] EWCA Civ 904
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Anthony Malone; Defendant/appellant: Relyon Heating Engineering Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claim barred by limitation.
Legal Topics
Limitation Period, Noise Induced Hearing Loss, Breach of Statutory Duty, Negligence, Section 33 Limitation Act 1980
Tort Employment Law Personal Injury Limitation Period Noise Induced Hearing Loss Breach of Statutory Duty Negligence Section 33 Limitation Act 1980

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Malone

Claimant/respondent

Relyon Heating Engineering Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the limitation period under section 33 Limitation Act 1980 should be disapplied for the claimant's hearing loss claim
  2. 2 Whether hearing loss is a divisible injury for limitation purposes
  3. 3 Assessment of prejudice caused by delay in bringing the claim

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred by treating hearing loss as an indivisible injury and applying a single limitation period; the claim should have been divided into pre-2001 and post-2001 injuries, with separate consideration of prejudice and delay. The prejudice to the defendant from delay outweighed the claimant's interests, making it inequitable to disapply the limitation period for either period.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claim barred by limitation.

Orders

  • Claim dismissed; limitation period not disapplied under section 33 Limitation Act 1980.