header-logo header-logo

08 January 2016
Issue: 7681 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Judgments on judgments

My understanding is that there is no time limit on the enforcement of a money judgment but that a fresh action based on a money judgment is subject to a six-year limitation period. Apart from securing interest on the judgment which would not otherwise be payable, I cannot conceive of any reason why the judgment creditor would wish to bring a fresh action. Is there one?

The Limitation Act 1980, s 24 bars an action to enforce a judgment which became enforceable more than six years previously. However, this bar relates only to enforcement by “a fresh action”; enforcement by way of a charging order, an attachment of earnings order or bankruptcy proceedings are not caught by s 24. The advantage is that, for example, where a judgment has not been satisfied after five years, the judgment creditor could issue a second claim based on the original judgment and thereby start the six-year clock for enforcement running afresh. This might be useful if the judgment debtor has gone missing or, as the first six years

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll