QB-2022-001364 - [2025] EWHC 2758 (KB)
Fecha: 30-Oct-2025
Ofcom’s case on limitation
Ofcom’s case on limitation
Mr Holmes argued that the allegation was of breach of the duty, under section 8(4) of the WTA 2006 to “make” regulations which exempted the relevant uses of GSM Gateways. This duty was discharged by Ofcom beginning the process, under section 122 of the WTA 2006, of making regulations. This had happened at the end of 2015, and therefore significantly more than 6 years before the COSUGs claim was brought. In the case of COMUGs, it had happened on 6 July 2017 and therefore around 7 weeks more than 6 years before this claim was brought. Both claims were therefore out of time.
Mr Holmes also argued, in the alternative, that section 8(4) required Ofcom to “make” regulations but did not in terms require them to be brought into force. The 2016 Exemption Regulations were made on 5 April 2016 and the fact that they did not come into force until 28 April 2016 was irrelevant. The COSUGs claim was therefore out of time in any event.
- Heading
- Introduction
- The factual and legal context for the claims
- Edge’s pleaded claim in these proceedings
- As a matter of law does Edge have an actionable claim in damages in relation to the breaches of statutory duty which it alleges?
- The broad issues under this heading
- Mr Strickland’s first submission in greater detail
- Discussion and conclusion on Mr Strickland’s first argument
- The principles applicable to determining whether there is a right to claim damages for breach of section 8(4) of the WTA 2006
- Edge’s argument
- Discussion
- Are the claims or either of them time-barred?
- Section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980
- When were the claims “brought”?
- Edge’s case on limitation
- Ofcom’s case on limitation
- Discussion and conclusion
- Conclusions