Limitation of Actions Consultation - Law Commission

Consumer Protection Act 1987 21
are very complicated. The leading judgments on
the distinction between actual and constructive knowledge, particularly in claims
for personal injury, are extremely difficult and are at points irreconcilable. 22
The
approach to disability under the Latent Damage Act 1986 is hard to understand. 23
Simplification is both necessary and achievable.
11.7 The consequence of this complexity must inevitably be confusion for many
practitioners. While, no doubt, specialist lawyers have got used to the complexity,
the ‘high street’ solicitor can be forgiven for approaching the law of limitations
with a considerable degree of trepidation. Certainly there are numerous pitfalls for
the uninitiated.
11.8 If the law on limitations is difficult to understand for practitioners, it must be
incomprehensible for members of the public. This is unacceptable, especially since
the consequences of misunderstanding the law can be to eliminate valid claims.
(3) Outdated
11.9 The law on limitations is, in some respects, outdated. Some of the periods laid
down may be thought to reflect assumptions about what time limits were
reasonable from an age before computers, when methods of communication and
retrieval of information were slow and cumbersome. The most familiar limitation
period of six years originated in the limitation period set in the Limitation Act
1623, when documents sent by horse or ship were the sole means of
communication other than face to face contact. The law has perpetuated
traditional distinctions which have lost any relevance they once had. Examples
include the restriction of the concept of acknowledgements to liquidated claims, 24
and that actions on a contract executed by deed have a twelve year limitation
period while actions on a simple contract have a six year period. 25
In addition, the
law of limitations cannot easily be applied to some causes of action which have
been recently developed. In particular, the Limitation Act 1980 does not naturally
apply to the newly-recognised law of restitution founded on unjust enrichment. 26
(4) Uncertain
11.10 In some areas, the law lacks certainty. For example, the scope of certain causes of
action which have been identified in the 1980 Act, such as actions for sums due
under an enactment, 27
is unclear. The correct interpretation of the provisions on
actual and constructive knowledge, 28
on conversion, 29
and on breach of trust 30
is
21 See para 3.102 above.
22 See paras 3.58 - 3.65 above.
23 See paras 8.6 - 8.10 above.
24 See para 8.32 above.
25 See para 3.1 above.
26 See Part V above.
27 See paras 7.10 - 7.21 above.
28 See paras 3.52 - 3.65; 3.94 - 3.98.
29 See paras 3.108 - 3.115.
243