header-logo header-logo

Limitation: Not just racing against the clock

257142
© Getty images
Laura Benghiat considers why litigators may need to revisit their limitation analysis as a case develops
  • Reviews key appellate decisions on limitation handed down in 2026, covering court fees, substitution, latent damage, fiduciary claims and the implications of delay where no statutory limitation period applies

Limitation can look deceptively tidy: identify the cause of action, calculate when the limitation period ends and issue in time. Job done. However, commercial disputes are rarely so orderly. Clients discover facts in stages, the correct defendant may not be obvious, corporate structures change, and claims evolve, sometimes over many years.

For litigators advising on long-running, complex disputes, this means limitation risks may emerge in ways that were not apparent when first instructed. If missed or mismanaged, the consequences can be severe.

In the first half of 2026, the appellate courts addressed a diverse range of limitation issues. Viewed together, these decisions reveal no overarching claimant- or defendant-friendly direction of travel, but they offer practical guidance and point to a

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

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Heavyweight patent litigator will bolster Carpmaels Ransford’s rapidly growing Litigation team as firm marks its 250th anniversary

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed plans to create specialist rape and serious sex offences courtrooms at every Crown Court
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
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
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’
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
back-to-top-scroll