Ojewale v Kearns & Anor (Approved) [2021] IEHC 431 (16 June 2021)

Ojewale v Kearns & Anor (Approved) [2021] IEHC 431 (16 June 2021)

Proceedings against both defendants were issued within the period to be disregarded under s.50 of the PIAB Act, as the supplemental application under s.46(3) was made by reference to the original s.11 application and authorisation, and the statutory scheme does not limit the timing of s.46(3) applications to the period when the statute is suspended. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is not statute barred.

Citation
[2021] IEHC 431
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Tesleem Ojewale; Defendant/respondent: Caroline Kearns; Defendant/respondent: Frank Kearns
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
16 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Appeal / High Court Appeal From Circuit Court Order Striking Out Proceedings as Statute Barred
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Circuit Court order set aside.
Legal Topics
Statute of Limitations, Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act, Procedural Time Limits, Authorisation Process
Personal Injury Statutory Interpretation Statute of Limitations Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act Procedural Time Limits Authorisation Process

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tesleem Ojewale

Plaintiff/appellant

Caroline Kearns

Defendant/respondent

Frank Kearns

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Appeal / High Court Appeal From Circuit Court Order Striking Out Proceedings as Statute Barred

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings against both defendants were statute barred under the Statute of Limitations and PIAB Act
  2. 2 Effect of supplemental PIAB application under s.46(3) on limitation period for original and added defendants

Ratio Decidendi

Proceedings against both defendants were issued within the period to be disregarded under s.50 of the PIAB Act, as the supplemental application under s.46(3) was made by reference to the original s.11 application and authorisation, and the statutory scheme does not limit the timing of s.46(3) applications to the period when the statute is suspended. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is not statute barred.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Circuit Court order set aside.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's appeal allowed.
  • Order of 15 December 2020 striking out proceedings set aside.