Rt Hon Herbert Robert Cayzer Baron Rotherwick, Executors Of The Estate Of v Oxfordshire County Council [2000] EWLands LCA_43_1999 (21 March 2000)

Rt Hon Herbert Robert Cayzer Baron Rotherwick, Executors Of The Estate Of v Oxfordshire County Council [2000] EWLands LCA_43_1999 (21 March 2000)

The claim for compensation is statute-barred under section 9 of the Limitation Act 1980. The convention between parties that the claim was enforceable did not amount to an estoppel preventing the authority from relying on limitation, especially given the 17-month delay after notice of intention to rely on limitation. The statutory limitation period applies and the claimants failed to act within a reasonable time after being notified.

Citation
[2000] EWLands LCA_43_1999
Parties
Claimants: Executors of the Estate of Rt Hon Herbert Robert Cayzer Baron Rotherwick; Compensating Authority: Oxfordshire County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Compensation Claim Under Highways Act 1980 / Decision on Preliminary Issue
Outcome
claim dismissed as statute-barred
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Estoppel by Convention, Compensation for Public Path Creation, 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 39 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Executors of the Estate of Rt Hon Herbert Robert Cayzer Baron Rotherwick

Claimants

Oxfordshire County Council

Compensating Authority

Procedural Posture

Compensation Claim Under Highways Act 1980 / Decision on Preliminary Issue

  1. 1 Is the compensation claim statute-barred under the Limitation Act 1980?
  2. 2 Should the compensating authority be estopped from relying upon the limitation period?

Ratio Decidendi

The claim for compensation is statute-barred under section 9 of the Limitation Act 1980. The convention between parties that the claim was enforceable did not amount to an estoppel preventing the authority from relying on limitation, especially given the 17-month delay after notice of intention to rely on limitation. The statutory limitation period applies and the claimants failed to act within a reasonable time after being notified.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed as statute-barred

Orders

  • claimants to pay respondent's costs of the reference
  • costs to be assessed on the standard basis if not agreed