A v Iorworth Hoare

A v Iorworth Hoare

The Court of Appeal held that it was bound by Stubbings v Webb to find that claims for damages for intentional sexual assault are subject to a non-extendable six-year limitation period under section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980, and not the extendable three-year period under section 11. The Human Rights Act 1998 cannot be used to construe the Act differently where the limitation period expired before its commencement. Vicarious liability or concurrent duties of care do not circumvent the limitation bar. All appeals were dismissed as statute-barred.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: A; Respondent/defendant: IORWORTH HOARE; Appellant/claimant: H; Respondent/defendant: SUFFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL; Intervenor: SECRETARY OF STATE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS; Appellants/claimants: X & Y; Respondent/defendant: LONDON BOROUGH OF WANDSWORTH
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 April 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court and County Courts to Court of Appeal
Outcome
All appeals dismissed as statute-barred.
Legal Topics
Limitation Periods for Intentional Torts, Vicarious Liability, Sexual Abuse Claims, Human Rights Act Application, Statutory Interpretation
Tort Law Limitation of Actions Personal Injury Limitation Periods for Intentional Torts Vicarious Liability Sexual Abuse Claims Human Rights Act Application Statutory Interpretation

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Appellant/claimant

IORWORTH HOARE

Respondent/defendant

H

Appellant/claimant

SUFFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL

Respondent/defendant

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS

Intervenor

X & Y

Appellants/claimants

LONDON BOROUGH OF WANDSWORTH

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court and County Courts to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claims for damages for intentional sexual assault are subject to a non-extendable six-year limitation period under section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980 or an extendable three-year period under section 11.
  2. 2 Whether the Human Rights Act 1998 enables a different construction of the Limitation Act to allow extension of time for such claims.
  3. 3 Whether vicarious liability or concurrent duties of care can circumvent the limitation bar for claims against public authorities or employers.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that it was bound by Stubbings v Webb to find that claims for damages for intentional sexual assault are subject to a non-extendable six-year limitation period under section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980, and not the extendable three-year period under section 11. The Human Rights Act 1998 cannot be used to construe the Act differently where the limitation period expired before its commencement. Vicarious liability or concurrent duties of care do not circumvent the limitation bar. All appeals were dismissed as statute-barred.

Court Disposition

All appeals dismissed as statute-barred.

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed.
  • Permission to appeal to the House of Lords granted on questions of principle.