Dunn v Parole Board [2008] EWCA Civ 374; [2008] WLR (D) 110
“In the context of CPR Pt 11, the limitation provisions within s 7(5) of the Human Rights Act 1998 provided a defence to a claim rather than going to jurisdiction, so that a failure to apply to strike out within 14 days of acknowledging service did not preclude a defendant from applying to strike out a claim on the basis of limitation.
The Court of Appeal so stated when dismissing the appeal of the claimant, Peter Dunn, from a decision of Judge Darroch, sitting in the Norwich County Court on 29 March 2007, striking out his claims against the defendant, The Parole Board, under the Human Rights Act 1998 and for false imprisonment arising out of his detention after recall to prison from that part of his sentence he was serving on licence in the community. There had been delay in the management of the case by the defendant. The grounds of appeal were that: (i) the court should have determined under CPR Pt 11 that the filing of an acknowledgment of service by the defendant precluded it from arguing the issue of limitation under s7(5) of the 1998 Act; (ii) the judge erred in finding that the claim for false imprisonment had no real prospect of success; (iii) the case was appropriate for the court to extend the period for bringing the claim under s7(5) of the 1998 Act.”
WLR Daily, 17th April 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
