Ryan v. Connolly [2001] IESC 9 (31 January 2001)

Ryan v. Connolly [2001] IESC 9 (31 January 2001)

There was no clear and unambiguous representation by the defendants or their insurers that would have reasonably led the plaintiff to believe that the Statute of Limitations would not be relied upon if proceedings were not issued within the limitation period. The correspondence did not amount to a waiver or estoppel, and thus the defendants are entitled to rely on the Statute of Limitations defence.

Citation
[2001] IESC 9
Parties
Plaintiff: Desmond Ryan; Defendant: Michael Connolly; Defendant: Anne Marie Connolly
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
31 January 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Statute of Limitations, Estoppel, Personal Injury, Without Prejudice Correspondence
Civil Procedure Tort Law Statute of Limitations Estoppel Personal Injury Without Prejudice Correspondence

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Desmond Ryan

Plaintiff

Michael Connolly

Defendant

Anne Marie Connolly

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are estopped from relying on the Statute of Limitations defence due to their conduct and correspondence
  2. 2 Whether 'without prejudice' correspondence can be considered in determining estoppel against the Statute of Limitations

Ratio Decidendi

There was no clear and unambiguous representation by the defendants or their insurers that would have reasonably led the plaintiff to believe that the Statute of Limitations would not be relied upon if proceedings were not issued within the limitation period. The correspondence did not amount to a waiver or estoppel, and thus the defendants are entitled to rely on the Statute of Limitations defence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the High Court set aside
  • Order determining that the defendants are not precluded from relying on a defence under the Statute of Limitations, 1957