Claiming Injury Compensation – Too Late To Claim?

For anyone who has developed a condition or injury over an extended time period, it’s not uncommon to assume it’s too late to claim compensation. The personal injury lawyers at ParrisWhittaker have years of experience helping clients with illnesses and injuries claim compensation – often long after the events in question.

After a recent court decision¹, many individuals will be reassured to know that a judge decided that a mere ‘suspicion’ that someone else was responsible for an injury or condition is not enough to impose a time limit on starting a formal claim – actual knowledge is required.

Limitation periods

In any cause of action, the Statute of Limitations applies. This means legal proceedings must be commenced within a specific period of time, otherwise it may be time-barred. There are good public policy reasons for the rule – particularly, it protects an individual or organisation from being potentially liable to someone else in perpetuity.

In personal injury cases, the limitation period in the Bahamas for injury compensation claims is three years. In the case of a child or an incapacitated person, the limitation period starts to run when they reach 18 (or regain mental capacity). In the Turks & Caicos Islands it is also three years, but six years in Jamaica.

But at what point does that time period start to run?

Date of knowledge

In the majority of cases, the limitation period starts with the date an accident occurred, causing the individual’s injuries.

But if the injury has slowly developed, or the individual has started to suffer symptoms of illness or, for example, a condition caused in the workplace, the limitation period starts to run from the ‘date of knowledge’ or the date on which the cause of action accrued.

In these cases, the date of knowledge can become a source of uncertainty or dispute and much can turn on the issue.

What happened in this case?

In January 2018, the plaintiff (Leila) crossed a light railway track in Dublin, tripped and fell. She alleged that the pedestrian crossing she used was unsafe and dangerous.

The defendant transport company (D) applied to have Leila’s case struck out on the basis that it was out of time under Ireland’s Statute of Limitations 1957, having been issued on 6 December 2022.

Laila argued that her ‘date of knowledge’ that D was responsible for maintenance of the pedestrian crossings only arose on 27 July 2022 when the second defendant’s (D2) defence was delivered. In its defence, D2 blamed D for the condition of the crossing. As a consequence, she then amended her summons which was served on D in the December.

Suspicion v Knowledge

The court ruled that a ‘a mere suspicion’ on the part of a party or their lawyers that someone else may be responsible for the accident, is not sufficient to fix the party with the required knowledge under the Limitation Act. (Reasonable belief will normally suffice.)

The judge was not satisfied that Leila’s solicitor at the time had anything like the required knowledge at an earlier point on time; and there was no evidence putting him under a duty to make further enquiries in relation to any particular defendant.

Leila’s date of knowledge as to the identity of D – a party with potential responsibility for maintenance of the crossing at the time of the accident – did not arise until at least July 2022. Her action was not time-barred and she could proceed with her compensation claim.

How can we help?

If you’re suffering injury or a condition which may have been caused a long time ago, and you’re unsure if you can claim, speak to a specialist personal injury solicitor as soon as possible.

Contact Jacy Whittaker at ParrisWhittaker for expert advice on at +1.242.352.6112.

¹Anglade v Transdev Dublin Light Rail Limited & Ors