Is the statute of limitations fairly irrelevant?
<p>For example, say someone suffers an injury that produces a neurological condition years later.</p>
<p>Can the statute of limitations be extended basically indefinitely, up to the point the condition occurs?</p>
<p>Say someone breaches a contract and remains in breach of it for years. Does the clock start only at the first breach, or does it continue forever as long as the contract remains in breached state? I.e., can you evade a lawsuit by making a small breach, which is forgiven, then wait 4 years and then you can breach it all you want because the first breach already occured?</p>

<h2>Limitation Acts are multi-faceted and account for such things</h2>
<p>For example, <a href="/questions/tagged/new-south-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;" rel="tag">new-south-wales</a>, you can look at this <a href="https://www.lawcover.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Schedule-of-Limitations-2018.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">guide</a> which lays out the intricacies.</p>
<p>So, for personal injuries for acts or omissions on or after 6/12/02 we have:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>First to expire of:</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>(a) 3 years from the date when the cause of action is discoverable:
s50C(1)(a) Limitation Act 1969 (no extension of this period is
available); or</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>(b) 12 years from time when act or omission causing injury or death
occurred: s50C(1)(b) Limitation Act 1969 (limited rights of extension exist)</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>For criteria of discoverability see s50D Limitation Act 1969</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Note: For minors, the running of the limitation period is not suspended until minor reaches 18 years if the minor has a capable parent or guardian: s50F(2)(a) Limitation Act 1969 and see also s50A(2) (but see Child Abuse cases below)</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Minors injured by parent or guardian or “close associate” of parent or guardian - limitation period commences when minor turns 25, or from date of discovery (whichever is the latter): s50E(1)(a) and (b) Limitation Act 1969 (but see Child Abuse cases below)</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Incapacitated person - limitation period not suspended if person is a “protected person”: s50F(2)(b) Limitation Act 1969
Latent injuries - no special provisions</p>
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
<p>can you evade a lawsuit by making a small breach, which is forgiven, then wait 4 years and then you can breach it all you want because the first breach already occured?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>No. Those would be separate breaches of one same contract, and the statute of limitations operates individually for each breach. The waiver of legal action pursuant to the first breach, such as where the injured party lets the statute of limitations expire, does not forfeit filing suit for breaches for which the statute of limitations has not expired.</p>
<p>Even if a party repeatedly breaches one same clause, the injured party can sue for all the breaches for which the statute of limitations has not expired. The fact that those breaches are similar in nature does not tie them to the same deadline for commencing court proceedings.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Is the statute of limitations fairly irrelevant?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>No. It is important to distinguish between the <em>date</em> when a breach occurs, and the <em>duration</em> of its harmful effects. The statute of limitations relates only to the former (i.e., the date) even if the duration of its harmful effects coincides with the contract remaining in its breached state.</p>
<p>The reason of being, or one main reason of being, of the statute of limitations is the premise that the parties' memory fades over time. The persistence of harmful effects does not necessarily imply that the defendant and third-parties/witnesses remember the circumstances of the breach. And the greater the delay in commencing court proceedings, the likelier that the defendant and non-parties has disposed/eliminated evidence with which the defendant could dispute the claims or charges. <em>In theory</em>, such factors put the defendant at a disadvantage insofar as these impair his ability to defend &amp; prove his position.</p>

statute-of-limitations