▁as ▁provided ▁six ▁years , ▁as ▁provided ▁by ▁S 9 ▁of ▁the ▁Lim itation ▁Act ▁ 1 9 8 0 . ▁If ▁it ▁is ▁for ▁two ▁years ▁the ▁claim ▁fails , ▁if ▁it ▁is ▁six ▁years ▁the ▁claim ▁succeed s ." ▁ ▁His ▁Hon our ▁Judge ▁Y el ton ▁found ▁Thom son ▁Air ways ▁Ltd ' s ▁argument ▁to ▁be ▁" spe cious " ▁and ▁found ▁in ▁favour ▁of ▁Mr ▁Daw son ▁stating : ▁ ▁" It ▁seems ▁to ▁be ▁me ▁that ▁if ▁I ▁apply ▁the ▁principles ▁set ▁down ▁by ▁the ▁European ▁Court , ▁which ▁are ▁very ▁clear , ▁compens ation ▁under ▁Article ▁ 7 ▁is ▁outside , ▁not ▁within , ▁the ▁prov isions ▁of ▁the ▁Montreal ▁Convention ▁and ▁so ▁in ▁those ▁circumstances ▁the ▁time ▁limit ▁is ▁not ▁fixed ▁by ▁that ▁Convention ▁but ▁by ▁the ▁general ▁rules : ▁in ▁other ▁words ▁it ▁is ▁ 6 ▁years . ▁It ▁seems ▁to ▁me ▁that ▁it ▁is ▁a ▁bold ▁submission ▁on ▁the ▁part ▁of ▁the ▁def endant ▁that ▁the ▁court ▁should ▁not ▁follow ▁Mor é , ▁or ▁perhaps ▁more ▁exactly ▁that ▁it ▁should ▁not ▁follow ▁its ▁spirit ." ▁ ▁However , ▁recogn ising ▁the ▁importance ▁of ▁the ▁case ▁in ▁creating ▁a ▁binding ▁preced ent , ▁His ▁Hon our ▁Judge ▁Y el ton ▁gave ▁Thom son ▁Air ways ▁Ltd ▁the ▁right ▁to ▁take ▁the ▁case ▁to ▁the ▁Court ▁of ▁App e al . ▁ ▁Mr ▁Daw son ▁instruct ed ▁the ▁UK ▁leader ▁in ▁flight ▁delay ▁compens ation , ▁B ott ▁& ▁Co ▁Sol ic itors , ▁to