The Court of Appeal rejected the claimant’s appeal against the decision that his claim was time-barred. His claim against the solicitors who had acted on a fraudulent transfer of his property accrued when they passed on the forged transfer. The claimant’s argument, relying on Law Society v Sephton, that he did not suffer damage until he ceased to be the registered proprietor of the property was wrong. The court also rejected the argument that the solicitor owed the claimant a continuing duty and that this was capable of postponing the commencement of the limitation period (Nouri v Marvi www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/1107.html).