DEBORAH GIDDENS v BRIAN FROST & Ors.

DEBORAH GIDDENS v BRIAN FROST & Ors.

The claimant did not discover, and could not with reasonable diligence have discovered, the alleged breaches or fraud prior to 26 November 2016. There is insufficient evidence to conclude that the claimant had actual or constructive knowledge before that date or that she deliberately destroyed evidence. Therefore, the claims are not statute-barred under section 32 or section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980.

Parties
Claimant: Deborah Giddens; First Defendant: Brian Frost; Second Defendant: The Frost Partnership; Third Defendant: George Ronald Frost
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial of Preliminary Issue on Limitation
Outcome
Claimant's claims are not statute-barred; preliminary issue answered in claimant's favour.
Legal Topics
Limitation Periods, Deliberate Concealment, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Negligent Advice, Destruction of Evidence
Limitation of Actions Fraud Professional Negligence Limitation Periods Deliberate Concealment Fraudulent Misrepresentation Negligent Advice Destruction of Evidence

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deborah Giddens

Claimant

Brian Frost

First Defendant

The Frost Partnership

Second Defendant

George Ronald Frost

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Trial of Preliminary Issue on Limitation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's claims are statute-barred under the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether the claims based on negligent advice are time-barred
  3. 3 Whether the claimant had actual or constructive knowledge of the alleged wrongdoing prior to November 2016

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant did not discover, and could not with reasonable diligence have discovered, the alleged breaches or fraud prior to 26 November 2016. There is insufficient evidence to conclude that the claimant had actual or constructive knowledge before that date or that she deliberately destroyed evidence. Therefore, the claims are not statute-barred under section 32 or section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980.

Court Disposition

Claimant's claims are not statute-barred; preliminary issue answered in claimant's favour.

Orders

  • The preliminary issue is answered 'no'—the claims are not statute-barred.
  • Directions given for applications for permission to appeal and consequential matters.