- Clinical negligence, mental capacity, limitation (Aderounmu v Colvin)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- Warning to claimant solicitors
- Protected parties
- Court’s approach to LA 1980, s 33
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Date of knowledge
- LA 1980, s 33
- Case details
PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: The claimant in a clinical negligence case alleged that his GP had failed to refer him for urgent investigations of a possible stroke. In the trial of the preliminary issue of limitation, the court held that: (1) the claimant had capacity to conduct the litigation; (2) the claimant had actual or constructive knowledge under section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) over three years prior to issuing proceedings—the proceedings were therefore statute-barred; (3) it was equitable to disapply the limitation provisions under LA 1980, s 33 and allow the action to proceed to trial. The case provides an example of the court’s determination of the question of a claimant’s mental capacity to litigate by reference to wide-ranging factual and expert evidence. Written by Sarah Christie-Brown, barrister at Hailsham 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