UK: Tort and Time Bars - Suing by Stop Watch

Last Updated: 27 May 2002
Article by Miriam Bartlett

Even the laziest law student knows that the ingredients of a tort claim for professional negligence are duty, breach and damage. Time starts to run once all 3 elements are present. In Malik Khan -v- RM Falvey & Co, the Court of Appeal reminded the legal profession of these basic principles in a professional negligence claim where several debt recovery actions were struck out for want of prosecution.

Until Khan, the assumption was that time runs from the date the court strikes out the negligent litigation, and not before, if suing a solicitor who allows litigation to be struck out. This was thought to be so even if the case had been dead on its feet for years before the court put it out of its misery with a strike-out order. It was certainly a convenient assumption in that it provided a clear and easily identifiable trigger date for limitation purposes, and made quantification of the loss easier as it was performed with hindsight. This assumption cannot survive after Khan.

On 2 June 1999, Malik Khan issued proceedings alleging his solicitor had conducted debt recovery actions negligently from 1987 until 1999 : the actions were struck out between 1997 and January 1999. The Claimant did not instruct the Defendant firm continuously from 1987 onwards: he would occasionally handle the litigation himself, re-instructing the Defendant when matters became complex, on at least one occasion a few days before a Court hearing; he also instructed other firms to handle the same actions on similar terms. Every solicitor knows this can be a recipe for disaster. Despite the Defendant's best efforts (negligence was denied), disaster befell.

The Claimant pleaded (a) that judgments should have been obtained in the three debt recovery actions by 1987, 1988 and an unspecified date; (b) that two actions were vulnerable to strike-out from 1990 and 1992 respectively - the vulnerability of the third was not specified; and (c) that the l suffered was wasted litigation costs paid in the 1980s and early 1990s and loss of the chance to recover the debts themselves by 1988, 1989 and an unspecified date. (The third case was not pleaded clearly and the Court of Appeal's attempts to elicit a more detailed set of facts during the appeal hearing were unsuccessful. In the end, the Court of Appeal took the view it was statute barred on the facts pleaded.)

The Claimant's Leading Counsel relied on Hopkins v McKenzie [1995] PIQR43(CA), a loss of opportunity personal injury action against a doctor. Hopkins was a very narrowly pleaded case, claiming only for the loss of the chance to pursue the original action. There was no allegation that the value of the action had been diminished at any point prior to its being struck out. The court in Hopkins concluded the loss was only sustained when the original personal injury action had been struck out and not before.

The Court of Appeal in Khan went back to first principles of tort and had a close look at what constitutes actual damage: "any detriment, liability or loss capable of assessment in money terms [including] liabilities which may arise on a contingency…loss of earning capacity, loss of a chance or bargain, loss of profit..." [Forster v Outred]. The Court of Appeal pointed out that the Claimant in Khan had sustained actual damage more than six years before the date on which he issued proceedings against the Defendant.

The Court of Appeal then reviewed Hopkins citing the judgment of Saville LJ, in particular the fact that at the relevant limitation date the Plaintiff's cause of action as at the date of strike-out remained in being, adding "certainly the Plaintiff was by then potentially worse off as a result of the alleged negligence, since he was highly likely (if not foredoomed) to lose his cause of action. To my mind, however, he had not at that stage suffered that loss [loss of his cause of action] or damage""what on the Plaintiff's case has been lost is the right to advance his medical negligence claim in a Court of law. That loss was not sustained until the action was struck out. To my mind a cause of action for diminishing the value of a claim is not the same thing as a cause of action for losing the right to advance that claim in a Court of law" (emphasis and bracketed words added).

Unfortunately, in the author's view, Saville LJ then muddied the waters slightly in Hopkins by rejecting Rupert Jackson QC's submission that it was not necessary for the action actually to be struck out before the client could bring tort proceedings against the solicitor for negligence. The other two judges in Hopkins, Mann LJ and Nourse LJ, agreed with Saville's reasoning as cited above but Mann LJ reserved his position on Jackson's question of whether the diminution in value of a cause of action through its susceptibility to a strike out could constitute damage for the purposes of an action in negligence. He felt that it could but went on to stress that that was not the situation in Hopkins. Nourse LJ also was at pains to point out that Hopkins had not sued "in respect of the loss or damage suffered by him by reason of some earlier depreciation in value of his right of action against the Defendants" [emphasis added].

In Khan the Court of Appeal agreed with defence Counsel's submission that Hopkins v McKenzie could be distinguished on the facts. They nevertheless felt it was important to go on to address the other defence submissions that Hopkins was wrongly decided and/or could not stand in the light of the House of Lords decision in Nykredit Mortgage Bank PLC -v- Edward Erdman Group Limited (No.2) [1997] 1 WLR 1627.

Nykredit No 2 was a valuer's negligence case concerning the date on which interest on damages should start to run. The valuers over-valued a property by £1.4 million. In reliance on that over-valuation, the lender advanced £2.45 million to the borrower in March 1990 who defaulted at once. The House of Lords held that the lender's cause of action arose as soon as he made the advance because that was when he suffered loss on the facts of that particular case. They accepted that on some facts, a lender might not suffer loss the moment he made the advance: for example, if the borrower does not default at once, or if the over-valued security is nevertheless worth enough to cover the loan at the time of default. Their Lordships in Nykredit No 2 were unanimous in deciding that the cause of action arose when relevant and measurable loss was first revealed. Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead recognised that selecting such an early date might make it difficult in practice to quantify losses which are ongoing but took the view this was no reason to set a later date: "such difficulties as there may be are evidential and practical difficulties, not difficulties in principle".

Sir Murray Stuart-Smith in Khan stressed that a Claimant cannot defeat the statute of limitations by claiming only in respect of damage which occurs within the limitation period if he has suffered actual damage from the same wrongful acts outside the limitation period. He went further and held that where a Claimant decides to sue only for loss of his opportunity to pursue the original litigation, one may nevertheless conclude on the facts that he had "already suffered damage by diminution in the value of his chose in action well before the actual striking out of the actions". He goes on to stress there must be real damage, not nominal, and concludes: "…a claimant does not suffer real damage in the form of diminution of the value of his chose in action until there is a serious risk that the original action could be dismissed for want of prosecution… it does not seem to me that that diminution in value has to be quantified by a sale or settlement provided it can be shown that it has been substantial… If it is clear that the value of his chose in action has been substantially diminished before the limitation date, the action will be statute barred" [emphasis added].

Chadwick LJ in Khan distinguished between litigation cases where proceedings were struck out for want of prosecution after delays of months if not years ("delay strike-outs") and those cases where proceedings are struck out under CPR 3.4(2)(c) because of some failure to comply with a Rule, practice direction or Court order ("procedural strike-outs"). In the latter cases it is easy to see when the claim became liable to be struck out – it is the date when the solicitor fails to comply with the procedural requirement and that is when the opportunity to pursue the claim is lost: a case could have no residual value after such a date.

In the delay strike-outs, however, Chadwick LJ recognises it may be much more difficult to identify when the claim became vulnerable to being struck out. He states that once a claim becomes vulnerable to strike-out, its value begins to diminish and it is impossible to say damage has not occurred as a consequence of the previous delay. It is no answer that the damage may be difficult to quantify. If measurable damage has arisen from the delay then the cause of action is complete.

Where a Claimant pleads solely that he has lost his right to pursue the earlier action it will give rise to problems if the earlier action was worthless by the time it was eventually struck out. Chadwick LJ concludes that: "All that the Plaintiff could recover … would be the value of the claim immediately before the earlier action was struck out. If the Plaintiff's right to pursue the earlier action had become valueless by the time that action was struck out, the striking out of the action caused no loss; and, ex hypothesi, there could be no cause of action in tort arising from the strike out".

Tips for Practitioners

  • It is no longer safe to assume that time for suing for negligently conducted litigation starts when it is struck out by the court;
  • where proceedings are struck out because of some failure to comply with a Civil Procedure Rule, practice direction or Court order the start date is the date when the solicitor fails to comply with the procedural requirement;
  • where proceedings are struck out as a result of delay, the limitation period begins to run when that delay causes "real, not nominal, measurable" damage, assuming all the other ingredients of the tort of negligence are present;
  • once a claim becomes vulnerable to strike-out as a result of delay, its value begins to diminish and the court will take the view damage has occurred; it is no answer that the damage may be difficult to quantify at that early stage or that further damage may yet result – the limitation period has been triggered;
  • if the only pleaded case is one for damages for loss of the opportunity to pursue the struck out cause of action then it is correct to say that the Claimant's cause of action only accrues on strike-out; pleading a narrow case for lost cause of action still may not save the Claimant because the Court will look at the value of that cause of action at strike-out - if the claim is worthless by then because of earlier delays or poor conduct, then no loss is suffered on the claim being struck out, and without the "loss" element of the claim, there is no complete cause of action in tort.

Case Citation: Malik Javid Khan -v- R M Falvey & Co, 22 March 2002 (unreported), Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Schiemann LJ, Chadwick LJ and Sir Murray Stuart-Smith, on appeal from QB Division, McKinnon J.

This article first appeared in New Law Journal 24/5/2002 Page 782".

The content of this article does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on in that way. Specific advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.