- Limitation defence in non-recent abuse claim
- Original news
- What issues did this case raise? Why is it significant?
- Why did the court not exercise their section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 discretion?
- How helpful is this judgment in clarifying the law in this area? Are there any remaining grey areas?
- What are the practical implications of the judgment? What does all this mean for lawyers and their clients? What should they do next?
Personal Injury analysis: What are the main issues clarified by the judgement in F and S v TH? Ian Carroll, senior associate at Hill Dickinson LLP, examines in detail the judgment in F and S v TH, which demonstrates that the limitation defence still remains a valid defence in non-recent abuse claims, and that the courts will not exercise their unfettered discretion to allow claims to proceed, where appropriate.
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