header-logo header-logo

09 October 2008
Issue: 7340 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Limitation and substitution

Janna Purdie considers how courts deal with the addition/substitution of parties after the expiry of limitation periods

Limitation periods to add/substitute parties

The court, in considering whether to grant an application to substitute parties after the expiry of the limitation period, sets out when CPR 17.4 and CPR 19.5 apply. The court also sets out the basis on which it exercised its discretion when considering whether or not to grant the applications.
Facts of the case

A flooding incident occurred at a treatment works causing damage to an electricity substation owned by Manweb. The court heard two applications by the claimants in two consolidated proceedings to amend claim forms and statements of case. In both cases, the limitation period had expired. The applications were for the addition/substitution of parties under CPR 17.4 or CPR 19.5. The applicants maintained that they had been genuinely mistaken about the name of the original parties. In each claim, the intended parties were identified in the statements of case as being the owner/occupier of the treatment works and the main contractor of

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
Can a meticulously maintained spreadsheet turn a couple’s informal financial arrangements into legally enforceable obligations? 
back-to-top-scroll