McCoubrey v Ministry of Defence

McCoubrey v Ministry of Defence

The judge erred in law by applying a subjective test and considering the claimant's personal circumstances and career impact, rather than applying the objective test required by section 14(2) Limitation Act 1980. The claimant had knowledge of a significant injury by early 1994, so the claim was out of time under section 11(4)(b).

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Jason Stuart McCoubrey; Defendant/appellant: Ministry of Defence
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Limitation Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court decision overturned on section 14(2) issue; section 33 issue remitted to trial judge for determination.
Legal Topics
Limitation Period for Personal Injury Claims, Interpretation of 'date of Knowledge' Under Limitation Act 1980, Application of Section 14(2) Limitation Act 1980, Discretion Under Section 33 Limitation Act 1980
Limitation Law Personal Injury Limitation Period for Personal Injury Claims Interpretation of 'date of Knowledge' Under Limitation Act 1980 Application of Section 14(2) Limitation Act 1980 Discretion Under 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jason Stuart McCoubrey

Claimant/respondent

Ministry of Defence

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Limitation Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's personal injury claim was brought within the limitation period under section 11(4)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980 as expanded by section 14(2)
  2. 2 Whether the judge applied the correct legal test for 'date of knowledge' and 'significance' of injury under section 14(2)
  3. 3 Whether the claimant could rely on section 33 discretion if section 14(2) was not satisfied

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in law by applying a subjective test and considering the claimant's personal circumstances and career impact, rather than applying the objective test required by section 14(2) Limitation Act 1980. The claimant had knowledge of a significant injury by early 1994, so the claim was out of time under section 11(4)(b).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court decision overturned on section 14(2) issue; section 33 issue remitted to trial judge for determination.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Section 33 Limitation Act 1980 issue remitted to trial judge for determination.