header-logo header-logo

03 September 2009
Issue: 7383 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Limitation period

Seele Austria GmbH & Co KG v Tokio Marine Europe Insurance Ltd [2009] EWHC 2066 (TCC); [2009] All ER (D) 79 (Aug)

When asked to allow an amendment to bring a claim in what might be outside the limitation period, the court was not necessarily restricted to looking at the prejudice that had been suffered since the issue of the claim form but was entitled to compare the position in which the defendant would find itself if the new claim was allowed to go ahead outside the period and the position in which he would have been if the claim now sought to be put forward had been brought forward with reasonable expedition.

Were it otherwise a person who brought an action six months before the expiry of the limitation period who tried to substitute a new claim one month after the period expired would be in a more favourable position than someone who initiated an action two years after the accrual of the cause of action and sought to add a new claim one month after it expired.

Issue: 7383 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

Consumer credit law is heading for its biggest shake-up in 50 years, with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 set to yield much of its detailed statutory machinery to FCA rules
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
back-to-top-scroll