Statute Of Limitations: Supreme Court Considers When The 'Clock' Starts To Run In Professional Negligence Claims

• Published date: 22 June 2023
• Subject Matter: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Trials & Appeals & Compensation, Professional Negligence
• Law Firm: Dillon Eustace
• Author: Mr John O'Riordan, Peter Bredin and Rachel Turner

The Supreme Court's decision in Smith v Cunningham & Others [2023] IESC 13 provides helpful direction on the sometimes difficult question as to the point from which a cause of action accrues in a claim for professional negligence.

Negligence Claims involving 'Pure' Economic Loss

Section 11(2) Statute of Limitations Act 1957 Act (the '1957 Act') states that "an action founded on tort shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued."

A previous Supreme Court decision, Brandley v Deane [2017] IESC 83, which involved a negligence claim for damage to property, held that the time begins to run, for the purposes of the 1957 Act, when the damage 'manifested' itself, which the Court has previously considered to be when the damage becomes capable of being 'discovered' and 'proved' by a plaintiff.

However, the difficulty in determining the point at which damage has manifested itself in, what are termed, 'purely' economic cases can make the application of the 1957 Act challenging. This includes claims for professional negligence. The Supreme Court acknowledged that the application of a single coherent test in such cases can be problematic, with issues including;

• the propensity in cases of this type for a cause of action to accrue without a prospective plaintiff being aware that a loss has been suffered; and

• the fact economic loss may be wholly or partially contingent reversible, uncertain and/or the product of fluctuations in valuations.

Background

The plaintiff in this case claimed damages arising from his purchase of a property in 2006. An engineer...