Member

There is, however, an important nuance. Consistent with the way limitation operates more broadly, it would be suspended where there has been deliberate concealment. It is right that claimants should not be prejudiced in circumstances where relevant information has been intentionally withheld from them. The amendment before us would go significantly further. In effect, it would represent a substantial departure from the settled case law established in Smith v RBS, weakening the certainty that that judgment provides. For those reasons, although I appreciate the intention behind the amendment, the Government cannot support it. I respectfully ask the noble Baroness not to press it.