The time bars on civil actions in Scottish courts are to be reviewed for the first time in decades.

Many litigants have fallen foul of such limits in recent years after discovering it is too late for them to sue.

Examples include David T Morrison & Co Ltd which found that it could not seek civil compensation after the Maryhill plastic factory explosion of 2004.

The business, whose Gael Home Interiors shop was next to the factory, waited until the outcome of a public inquiry in to the disaster before suing.

It then found it was time-barred because it had failed to lodge an action within five years of the incident itself. The decision cost the small firm some £1.5m.

This - and other cases - prompted the Scottish Law Commission, the statutory body responsible for recommending reforms to Scots Law to publish a discussion paper today.

The Commission stressed that time bars - or the law of prescription - did not have to be unfair.

David Johnston QC, leading the project, said: "The law of prescription plays an important role in balancing the interests of the parties to a

litigation.

"There is also a wider public interest in requiring litigation to be initiated promptly if it is to be initiated at all. The law has remained largely unchanged for 40 years."

David T Morrison took its case against the Maryhill factory owners, ICL Plastics, all the way to the Supreme Court in 2014.

Judges ruled by a majority of three to two against Morrison.

This effectively changed the understanding of the relevant law by ruling that the party suffering the loss merely had to be aware of the occurrence of that loss for the clock to start ticking.

The shop owners’ right to claim damages had therefore been lost.

The Scottish Law Commission paper discusses whether the law - as it is - is fair, and explores how it could be reformed.

Anyone with an interest has until May 23 to comment on the proposals.