Where the legislature has provided a discretion to extend the limitation period for personal injury claims, there is no rule or practice requiring the extension application to be dealt with as a separate application before trial; whether it is appropriate to do so depends on the circumstances. In cases involving psychiatric injury, where the date of accrual of the cause of action is inextricably linked to the question of whether the plaintiff suffered an injury and its nature, there may be a compelling argument for reserving the limitation question for trial. A prior refusal to extend time does not preclude a further application.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.