Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Application to amend defence in alleged mishandling of sexual offences investigation granted despite delay
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The High Court granted the State defendants' application to amend their defence in ongoing proceedings concerning alleged mishandling of a sexual offence investigation involving the plaintiff as a minor. The court allowed the addition of three preliminary objections: (1) lack of authorisation from the Personal Injuries Assessment Board for personal injuries claims, (2) reliance on statutory limitation periods (statute-barred claims), and (3) the argument that the claim for constitutional damages was not independently sustainable. The ruling was based on a finding that the late introduction of these defences did not cause prejudice to the plaintiff, as any limitation or authorisation issues would have existed regardless of the timing of the amendment. The court noted particular deficiencies in the plaintiff's pleadings, especially the lack of clarity regarding the specific causes of action against the State defendants.
amendment of defence – personal injuries claim – authorisation requirement – Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003 – statute of limitations – limitation periods – constitutional rights – European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 – sexual offences investigation – plaintiff as minor – misfeasance in public office – prejudice to plaintiff – breach of duty – PIAB authorisation – application to amend pleadings – RSC (Rules of the Superior Courts)
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
