Back in the mists of time....

Not sure about this House of Lords judgment which does away with the six-year-rule in relation to cases of sexual abuse. It was brought by a woman who was assaulted and raped some 20 years ago. Her attacker was jailed for that and other offences and served more than 15 years. Towards the end of his time in jail he was out on day release and bought a lottery ticket which netted him just over £7 million. The woman is now suing for compensation, and initially failed because her claim was brought more than six years after the event. This is the rule which the Law Lords have now overturned, or at least have given the Judge hearing such a claim the discretion to proceed with the case even though more than six years have passed. Like I say, not sure. The lady concerned is on record as saying that this is not about money, but about justice - but surely justice has been met by the prison sentence the man has served? This is a civil case, and therefore whatever she says this is clearly about money, and the civil law has always taken a common sense approach that in such cases there must be some finality - some point at which the parties can get on with their lives without the threat or expectation of a court case having to be taken into account. You can perhaps argue that six years is not long enough, but twenty years? - or more, because depend on it, it's only a matter of time before someone brings a case based on events which happened even longer ago. I've said it before - hard cases tend to make bad law.