Cressey v E Timm & Son Ltd. & Anor

Cressey v E Timm & Son Ltd. & Anor

Where a claimant is misinformed as to the identity of their employer and has no reason to suspect otherwise, the date of knowledge under section 14(1)(c) of the Limitation Act 1980 is postponed until the claimant actually learns the correct identity, provided there is no dilatory conduct by the claimant or their solicitors.

Parties
Respondent/claimant: Brian Cressey; Appellant/defendant: E Timm & Son Ltd; Appellant/defendant: E Timm & Son Holding Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation Period for Personal Injury Claims, Date of Knowledge Under Limitation Act, Employer Identity in Tort Claims

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Cressey

Respondent/claimant

E Timm & Son Ltd

Appellant/defendant

E Timm & Son Holding Ltd

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal

  1. 1 When does a claimant have knowledge of the identity of the defendant for limitation purposes under the Limitation Act 1980?
  2. 2 Does knowledge of the employer's name equate to knowledge of their identity for limitation purposes?

Ratio Decidendi

Where a claimant is misinformed as to the identity of their employer and has no reason to suspect otherwise, the date of knowledge under section 14(1)(c) of the Limitation Act 1980 is postponed until the claimant actually learns the correct identity, provided there is no dilatory conduct by the claimant or their solicitors.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.