“Unintentional personal injury claims must be brought in negligence, not trespass.”
Cooper negligently drove over Letang while she was sunbathing in a car park. Letang sued three years later in trespass to avoid the negligence limitation period. The negligence period had expired but the trespass period had not.
Whether an action for unintentional personal injury should be brought in negligence or trespass to the person, and which limitation period applies.
The Court of Appeal held that unintentional personal injury claims must be brought in negligence. The trespass limitation period did not apply, and the claim was time-barred.
This case clarified the boundary between trespass and negligence, establishing that intention is the key distinguishing factor. It's crucial for understanding when to use different causes of action and their respective limitation periods in personal injury cases.
You're reading the free summary of Letang v Cooper. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
Letang v Cooper [1965] 1 QB 232
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.