Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
BOOK REVIEW - THE MODERN LAW OF LIMITATION
THE MODERN LAW OF LIMITATION. T. Prime, B.A., Ph. D., Solicitor, Lecturer in Law, University of Liverpool, and G. Scanlan, LL.B., Solicitor, Lecturer in Law, University of Liverpool. Butterworths, London (1993) xlvi and 295 pp. plus 8 pp. Index. Hardback £37.50.
The law on the limitation of actions is of importance to nearly all practitioners. It also raises many questions of theoretical interest. Yet the modern literature on the topic has been woefully thin, a notable exception being Professor Andrew McGee’s Limitation Periods (Sweet & Maxwell, 1990),
Prime and Scanlan’s book is aimed at the general practitioner. It is a useful and comprehensive work which, even if it does not provide all the answers, almost always points the reader in the right direction. There are chapters on not only contract, tort, land, trusts, administration of estates and actions pursuant to various statutes, but also on arbitration, practice and procedure, and private international law. The book is, by and large, well-written and clear. The sections on acknowledgement and part payment (pp. 44–58), the accrual of the cause of action in contract (Chap. 5) and the thorny problems of the burden of proof (pp. 251–253) are particularly interesting and helpful.
In the reviewer’s opinion those parts of the book dealing with contract and property law are sharper and more helpful than those on tort (albeit that there is a good discussion of concurrent liability in contract and tort on pp. 11–16). The pages dealing with claims in the tort of negligence for pure economic loss (including for defective buildings) are particularly disappointing. For example, the analysis of the impact of Murphy v. Brentwood D.C. [1991] 1 A.C. 398 lacks clarity and would have been considerably enhanced by reference to the extensive academic literature. And it surely cannot be right to suggest that the Latent Damage Act 1986 is in some sense only applicable to cases of latent damage to property and not to other cases of latent pure economic loss (pp.109, 150–151). On a different topic in tort, it may be regarded as misleading (p. 95) to refer to an award of provisional damages (under the Supreme Court Act 1981, s. 32A) for nuisance without clarifying that such damages are only available in respect of personal injury. It is also somewhat baffling to find “mortgages of personal property” included within the chapter on actions founded on tort. And it is perhaps surprising that the controversial decision of the House of Lords in Stubbings v. Webb [1993] A.C. 498 (that a claim for intentional trespass to the person does not fall under the Limitation Act 1980, s. 11(1)) is not subjected to any hint of criticism (pp. 153, 159).
Despite such weaknesses, practitioners will find this book of invaluable assistance, particularly given its comprehensivity. Whether it should be purchased in preference to McGee’s book, in which the cases are more rigorously analysed, is harder to answer. Ideally, space should be found for both.