Kimathi & Ors v Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2016] EWHC 600 (QB) (18 March 2016)

Kimathi & Ors v Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2016] EWHC 600 (QB) (18 March 2016)

It would not be just or in accordance with the overriding objective to try section 33 Limitation Act 1980 as a preliminary issue in this highly unusual group litigation, given the risks of delay, prejudice to elderly witnesses, and potential duplication of effort. However, the issues relating to the pre-1954 time bar, section 11, section 14, and section 32 Limitation Act 1980 are suitable to be tried as preliminary issues after the test Claimants have given evidence.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 600 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Eloise Mukami Kimathi & Ors; Defendant: Foreign & Commonwealth Office
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Group Litigation (personal Injury) / Interlocutory Application Regarding Preliminary Issues
Outcome
Application granted in part, refused in part
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Preliminary Issues, Case Management, Deliberate Concealment, Section 33 Discretion
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Tort Limitation of Actions Preliminary Issues Case Management Deliberate Concealment Section 33 Discretion

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

Eloise Mukami Kimathi & Ors

Claimant

Foreign & Commonwealth Office

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Group Litigation (personal Injury) / Interlocutory Application Regarding Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether limitation issues (pre-1954 time bar, section 11, section 14, section 32 Limitation Act 1980) should be tried as preliminary issues
  2. 2 Whether section 33 Limitation Act 1980 discretion should be tried as a preliminary issue

Ratio Decidendi

It would not be just or in accordance with the overriding objective to try section 33 Limitation Act 1980 as a preliminary issue in this highly unusual group litigation, given the risks of delay, prejudice to elderly witnesses, and potential duplication of effort. However, the issues relating to the pre-1954 time bar, section 11, section 14, and section 32 Limitation Act 1980 are suitable to be tried as preliminary issues after the test Claimants have given evidence.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part, refused in part

Orders

  • Issues relating to the pre-1954 time bar, section 11, section 14, and section 32 Limitation Act 1980 to be tried as preliminary issues after the test Claimants have given evidence.
  • Application to try section 33 Limitation Act 1980 as a preliminary issue is refused.