Lewisham v MR Ltd
Lewisham’s cause of action against MR accrued when MR failed to ensure the Sub-Contractor carried out proper work, i.e., by August 1996 at the latest, when defects became apparent. The claim is therefore statute-barred under the Limitation Act 1980.
- Parties
- Claimant: The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lewisham; Defendant: MR Limited
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 31 July 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Civil (tort Negligence) / Summary Judgment Application
- Outcome
- Summary judgment granted for the defendant on the limitation issue; amendments refused as pointless.
- Legal Topics
- Negligence, Duty of Care, Limitation Periods, Economic Loss, Summary Judgment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lewisham
Claimant
MR Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil (tort Negligence) / Summary Judgment Application
Legal Issues
- 1 What is the nature of the damage MR owed a duty of care to avoid?
- 2 When did the relevant damage occur for limitation purposes?
Ratio Decidendi
Lewisham’s cause of action against MR accrued when MR failed to ensure the Sub-Contractor carried out proper work, i.e., by August 1996 at the latest, when defects became apparent. The claim is therefore statute-barred under the Limitation Act 1980.
Court Disposition
Summary judgment granted for the defendant on the limitation issue; amendments refused as pointless.
Orders
- Lewisham’s tortious claim against MR for negligent supervision/inspection is struck out as statute-barred.
- Lewisham’s applications to amend its pleadings in relation to these issues are refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment