3M United Kingdom Plc & Anor v Linklaters & Paines (A Firm)

3M United Kingdom Plc & Anor v Linklaters & Paines (A Firm)

The claimants, through their legal officer Mr Herd, had knowledge on 30 August 1995 that the break clauses had been lost due to the 1989 assignment and that this loss was sufficiently serious to justify proceedings. This knowledge was sufficient under section 14A(5)-(7) of the Limitation Act 1980 to start the limitation period, rendering the claim time-barred when proceedings were commenced. Hopes of negotiation or landlord forbearance did not alter the fact of loss or its seriousness.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: 3M United Kingdom Plc; Claimant/appellant: 3M UK Holdings Plc; Defendant/respondent: Linklaters & Paines (a firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Preliminary Issue Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation Period for Negligence, Solicitor's Duty of Care, Knowledge Required to Bring Action, Loss of Commercial Rights
Limitation Law Professional Negligence Contract Law Limitation Period for Negligence Solicitor's Duty of Care Knowledge Required to Bring Action Loss of Commercial Rights

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

3M United Kingdom Plc

Claimant/appellant

3M UK Holdings Plc

Claimant/appellant

Linklaters & Paines (a firm)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Preliminary Issue Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants had the knowledge required under section 14A(5) of the Limitation Act 1980 before 1 September 1995 so as to render their claim time-barred
  2. 2 Whether loss of the break clause constituted relevant damage for limitation purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants, through their legal officer Mr Herd, had knowledge on 30 August 1995 that the break clauses had been lost due to the 1989 assignment and that this loss was sufficiently serious to justify proceedings. This knowledge was sufficient under section 14A(5)-(7) of the Limitation Act 1980 to start the limitation period, rendering the claim time-barred when proceedings were commenced. Hopes of negotiation or landlord forbearance did not alter the fact of loss or its seriousness.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.