header-logo header-logo

07 June 2007 / Andreas Gledhill
Issue: 7276 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

A cautionary tale

Andreas Gledhill explains the pitfalls of using protective claims

Faced with the imminent expiry of a limitation period, litigators acting for a potential claimant often seek to safeguard their client’s position by issuing a protective claim. They may have only a partial understanding of the facts, and may not have worked out how to put the case: so they issue a generally indorsed claim form to stop limitation running while they try to find out more, but hold off serving the defendant in the meantime.

Until now, this practice has largely gone unchallenged. That is set to change in the light of Mr Justice Cooke’s recent decision in Nomura International plc v Granada Group Ltd [2007] EWHC 642 (Comm), [2007] All ER (D) 404 (Mar).

PROTECTIVE CLAIMS

The practice of issuing protective claims appears to have grown up in the 1960s. One of the earliest references in a reported case is Rowe v Tregaskes [1968] 3 All ER 447, [1968] 1 WLR 1475, where Lord Denning MR referred to the claimant’s issue of “....what

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll