The high-profile legal case concerning the alleged phone hacking and covert recording by the press of celebrities, such as Prince Harry and Sir Elton John, in the 1990s and early 2000s, is back in Court.
One of the pivotal legal arguments from the owners of The Daily Mail, Associated Newspapers, is that regardless of any facts or evidence that may or may not be uncovered, the courts should not entertain these claims because they are outside the 6-year time limit in which you can bring a civil case for a breach of privacy.
This is not a problem only faced by the rich and famous. THP’s dispute resolution specialist Laura Colebrook has had many enquiries over the years where people have been sitting on their legal problems, and have been extremely restricted/unable to take action when they finally sought legal help because they left it too late and missed important legal deadlines.
So, what are the time limits for bringing civil cases?
The limitation period for a case will start to run at the time that the cause of action arises, ie. from the earliest time that the legal proceedings could first have been brought when an action happened or there was evidence of wrongdoing.
There are different time periods for certain types of claims as set out in the Limitation Act 1980, for example here are the time periods for claims relating to the following:
- Defamation and malicious falsehood: 1 year
- Contract: 6 years
- Personal injury: 3 years
- Debt arising under statute: 6 years
- Negligence: 6 years
- Breach of trust: 6 years
- Recovery of land: 12 years
These limitation periods are subject to some exceptions. For instance, in personal injury cases involving a child, the limitation period does not start to run until the child reaches the age of 18. Crucially for this case, limitation periods can be extended if concealment of wrong-doing is proved.
Celebrity Civil Claims
Privacy claims must be brought within six years, which in this case means before October 2016. This is to prevent evidence being tainted by fading memories, mental incapacity and/or the death of potential witnesses. However, the “Discovery Rule” under Section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980, means the six-year clock can be extended if a claimant can show they were unaware of a breach due to “fraud, concealment or mistake”. Under the law, the claimants need to satisfy the judge that they did not know and could not have known the facts earlier.
In this case, the claimants argue they only discovered they had a potential case recently, with many citing a “watershed moment” after October 2016 when they had reason to believe their privacy had been illegally invaded e.g. Liz Hurley had not known her phone had been tapped until a private investigator allegedly made a statement detailing what had happened in 2021, so the ‘evidence of wrong doing’ falls with the 6 year period.
Responding to this, Associated Newspapers has said the a) the articles in questions were published 20+ years ago and so are beyond the 6 year time limit and b) if the claimants are claiming details in particular articles published about them in The Daily Mail could only have been obtained by phone hacking they would have had enough time to take legal action before October 2016.
We will watch with interest how this case continues to unfold, as there is a lot at stake for all parties.
HOW WE CAN HELP
This case highlights the importance of ensuring any claims are commenced before the end of the limitation period. We would encourage you to seek legal advice early on if you feel you have a civil claim, so we can assess your case and confirm any time limits you need to be aware of. Please contact Laura Colebrook on e: l.colebrook@thpsolicitors.co.uk or t: 0118 338 3270.