| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Limitation Act 1963 ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Limitation Act 1963
The Limitation Act 1963 (1963 c.47) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that amended the statute of limitations to allow actions in some cases where the injured party had not discovered the injury until after the standard date of expiration. The Act was based on the report of the Davies Committee on Limitation of Actions in Cases of Personal Injury, created after the Court of Appeal decision in the case of ''Cartledge v Jopling'', and the Committee notably produced their final report before ''Cartledge'' had been heard in the House of Lords. The draft bill was presented to Parliament on 6 May 1963; it was given the Royal Assent on 31 July and came into force on the same day.
The act allowed an injured party to bring a claim outside the normal statute of limitations period if he could show that he was not aware of the injuries himself until after the limitation period had expired and if he gained the permission of the court. After a series of problems emerged, including vagueness on a point even the House of Lords was unable to clarify and poor draftsmanship, the Act was repealed bit by bit during the 1970s, with the Limitation Act 1980 scrapping the last remaining sections.
==Background==
Before the passing of the 1963 Act, the only exceptions to the normal statute of limitations (three years after the events that caused the injury, as established by the Law Reform (Limitation of Actions, etc.) Act 1954) were if the claim was being brought for a case of mistake or fraud, in which case the statute of limitations was twelve months from when the claimant could reasonably have been expected to discover the fraud or mistake.〔Dworkin (1964) p.47〕 In ''Cartledge v E. Jopling & Sons Ltd''〔() 1 All E.R. 341〕 the claimant sued Jopling after he developed pneumoconiosis from working in the company's poorly ventilated steel mills.〔Patten (2006) p.351〕 The injuries were sustained in October 1950 but they were not discovered until 1956, and as a result the injured party had no cause of action.〔Jolowicz (1964) p.199〕 Because the injuries had not been discovered until six years after they were caused, and the statute of limitations was three years after the injury itself, Cartledge was not legally allowed to bring a case.〔
Cartledge pursued the claim anyway in an attempt to have the law changed, and decisions were made against him in both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. After the Court of Appeal decision a Committee on Limitation of Actions in Cases of Personal Injury was created under Mr Justice Davies, which produced its report before the ''Cartledge'' case had even got to the House of Lords.〔Dworkin (1964) p.48〕 The report, published in September 1962, made several recommendations which found their way into a Limitation Bill placed before Parliament on 6 May 1963. While it was passing through the House of Lords, Lord Reid suggested it would be simpler to amend the Limitation Act 1937, but this was never acted on.〔 The act received the Royal Assent on 31 July 1963 and came into force immediately.〔
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Limitation Act 1963」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|