Remove Limitation Period
IICSA · The Report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse · Issued 20 October 2022 · Addressed to: UK Government
Government responseUK Government: Accepted in part (May 2023)
DeliveryUK Government says in progress (May 2026)
Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation, K.6
The Inquiry recommends that the UK government makes the necessary changes to legislation in order to ensure: the removal of the three-year limitation period for personal injury claims brought by victims and survivors of child sexual abuse in respect of their abuse; and the express protection of the right to a fair trial, with the burden falling on defendants to show that a fair trial is not possible. These provisions should apply whether or not the current three-year period has already started to run or has expired, except where claims have been: dismissed by a court; or settled by agreement. They should, however, only apply to claims brought by victims and survivors, not claims brought on behalf of victims and survivors' estates.
IICSA, The Report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse · 20 Oct 2022 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
AI-generated evidence summary
In May 2026, the Home Office and Ministry of Justice stated that provisions in the Crime and Policing Act 2026 will abolish time limits for victims bringing child sexual abuse claims regarding their own abuse, while placing the onus on defendants to show that a fair trial is not possible (Home Office and Ministry of Justice, May 2026). HM Government had committed in April 2025 to remove the three-year limitation period and reverse the burden of proof, having earlier stated in May 2023 that it would consult on options to reform limitation law (Home Office response, May 2023; Home Office, Apr 2025).
Sources
AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 26 Sep 2026.
Government response
●UK Government · Accepted in part · 22 May 2023
We accept the critical issue this recommendation seeks to remedy, and we will consult on strengthening existing judicial guidance in child sexual abuse cases and set out options to reform limitation law in child sexual abuse cases.
Extract from: Government response to the final report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse
Delivery
●UK Government says in progress · 11 May 2026
This reform will abolish the time limits for child sexual abuse claims made by victims in respect of their own abuse, recognising that child sexual abuse claims are nearly always brought some time after the incidents that gave rise to the claim and responding to a specific recommendation of the IICSA.
The Inquiry also recommended a reversal of the burden of proof when a challenge is made as to whether a fair trial can take place. We will place the onus on defendants to satisfy a court that a fair trial will not be possible, rather than (as at present) the burden falling on a claimant to show that it would be possible. This was another specific IICSA recommendation that reflected the emotional and practical difficulties the process involved for claimants which had the effect of deterring them from seeking access to justice.
From: Crime and Policing Act 2026: Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse recommendations factsheet
Earlier statements on delivery (0)
●UK Government · 9 Apr 2025
The Government has also committed to remove the three-year time limit for victims to bring civil child sexual abuse claims with the burden of proof falling on defendants (rather than victims, as at present) to show that a fair trial is not possible. This will protect victims from having to relive their trauma any more than is necessary.
From: Tackling child sexual abuse: progress update (accessible version)
How this page is built
The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.