EB v Haughton

EB v Haughton

The court exercised its discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 to allow the claim to proceed, finding the evidence of the Claimant and her witnesses cogent and the Defendant not materially prejudiced by the delay. The court found on the balance of probabilities that the Defendant committed the alleged sexual assaults, including digital penetration under the guise of massage, and awarded general and special damages but declined to award aggravated damages.

Parties
Claimant: EB; Defendant: John Haughton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Limitation Periods, Discretion to Disapply Limitation, Damages, Causation, Aggravated Damages
Tort Personal Injury Limitation of Actions Sexual Assault Limitation Periods Discretion to Disapply Limitation Damages Causation +1 more

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

EB

Claimant

John Haughton

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should exercise discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 to allow the claim to proceed despite expiry of the limitation period
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant committed the alleged sexual assaults
  3. 3 Quantum of damages and entitlement to aggravated damages

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 to allow the claim to proceed, finding the evidence of the Claimant and her witnesses cogent and the Defendant not materially prejudiced by the delay. The court found on the balance of probabilities that the Defendant committed the alleged sexual assaults, including digital penetration under the guise of massage, and awarded general and special damages but declined to award aggravated damages.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant

Orders

  • The Defendant to pay the Claimant £28,000 in general damages.
  • The Defendant to pay the Claimant £653 in interest on general damages.