- Between knowledge and suspicion in limitation (Su v Clarksons Platou Futures Ltd)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case Details
Commercial Analysis: A discussion of the case of Su (also known as Hsin Chi Su, Su Hsin Chi and Nobu Morimoto) v Clarksons Platou Futures Ltd and another  EWCA Civ 1115 in which the Court of Appeal considered section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980). Mr Su had sought to argue an extension of the limitation time period on the grounds that he did not have the necessary knowledge until a time less than three years before issue and that therefore summary judgment should not have been entered against him on the grounds of a time bar. However, the summary judgment at first instance was affirmed—Mr Su had had sufficient knowledge of a potential claim when at court and the Court of Appeal had determined that there was a good arguable case that he had suffered the damage and not just when a court finally determined that he had suffered the damage. Accordingly, his three years had already run out before he issued. Written by Rosamund Baker, a tenant at Selborne Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial