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.
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
Legal Issues
- 1 When does a claimant have knowledge of the identity of the defendant for limitation purposes under the Limitation Act 1980?
- 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.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment