header-logo header-logo

Judgments on judgments

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

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll