Boyd v Pickersgill & Le Cornu [1998] JLR 305 (06 August 1998)
- Citation
- [1998] JLR 305
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Civil / Judgment
More details
- Posture
- Civil / Judgment
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court held that mere ignorance of a cause of action is not sufficient to suspend the limitation period; suspension requires that it was practicably impossible for the plaintiff to bring the action within the limitation period.
Court disposition
claim dismissed
02
Material facts
Parties
Boyd
PlaintiffPickersgill & Le Cornu
Defendant03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil / Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
Whether mere ignorance of a cause of action suspends the limitation period under the doctrine of empêchement de fait.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Plaintiff argued that ignorance of the cause of action should suspend the limitation period.
- Respondent
- Defendant argued that only practical impossibility to bring the action suspends the limitation period, not mere ignorance.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Jersey law on limitation of actions
Mere ignorance of a cause of action does not constitute empêchement de fait suspending prescription; it must be practicably impossible for the plaintiff to bring the action within the limitation period.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court held that mere ignorance of a cause of action is not sufficient to suspend the limitation period; suspension requires that it was practicably impossible for the plaintiff to bring the action within the limitation period.
Court disposition
claim dismissed
Source and reliance status
Official court record
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court record
Judgment
[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [
DONATE ] Jersey Law Reports You are here:
BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Law Reports >> Boyd v Pickersgill & Le Cornu [1998] JLR 305 (06 August 1998) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/1998/JLR980305.html Cite as: [1998] JLR 305 [ New search ] [ Help ] Boyd v Pickersgill & Le Cornu 1998 JLR 305 (06 August 1998) Limitation of Actions - running of time - suspension of limitation - mere ignorance of cause of action not empêchement de fait suspending prescription-must be practicably impossible for plaintiff to bring action within limitation period The document you wish to view is available to registered users or can be purchased as a PDF. To purchase this document in PDF format or alternatively to Register to purchase membership go to the Jersey Law website via this link: 1998 JLR 305 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/1998/JLR980305.html
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.