header-logo header-logo

Civil Litigation

18 October 2007
Issue: 7293 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

O’Byrne v Aventis Pasteur SA [2007] EWCA Civ 939, [2007] All ER (D) 114 (Oct)

Section 35(6) of the Limitation Act 1980 provides that the addition or substitution of a new party cannot be regarded as necessary unless:

(i) there was a relevant mistake; or

(ii) an existing claim against the original party could not be maintained without the joinder or substitution of the new party. Thus, if there was either a mistake of a kind sufficient to satisfy (i) or the kind of necessity identified in (ii), then the test of necessity in s 35(5) is satisfied, but not otherwise. A party may therefore be substituted under s 35 where the 10-year limitation period for making a claim for damages caused by a defective product has expired, even where the correct party was known to the claimant before the limitation period expired, if the claimant had made a mistake about the name of the defendant and substitution was necessary for the purpose of determining the original
 action.

Issue: 7293 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll