Limitation Periods by Professor Andrew McGee is a well-established and definitive text now in its seventh edition. Professor McGee steers practitioners through the complexities of the law of limitations, giving detailed guidance in all areas of law from preliminary issues to proceedings. The book is designed to help bring an action in good time and remedy delays which may lead to striking out. The book covers European and international limitation issues.
The Second Supplement covers a number of significant cases which develop important areas of the subject and brings the work up-to-date to 5 May 2017.
Key updates included in the second supplement:
High Commissioner for Pakistan in the United Kingdom v Prince Mukkaram Jah and others on the question whether the pleading of a limitation defence can ever amount to an abuse of process.
Accrual of Cause of Action:
The principles laid down in Law Society v Sephton were considered and applied in Interface Europe Ltd v Premier Hank Dyers Ltd
Where a fiduciary uses his beneficiary’s money to confer a benefit on a company he controls he is denying the beneficiary’s title to the money for his own purposes and this amounts to a conversion for his own use. The same is true where a fiduciary causes his beneficiary to incur a liability for the benefit of a company which the fiduciary controls. Burnden Holdings (UK) Ltd (in liquidation) v Fielding and another
The decision in Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria was further considered in First Subsea Ltd (Formerly BSW Ltd) v Balltec Ltd and others where the Court of Appeal commented that that a director is a ‘trustee’ within the extended definition contained in s.38(1) and s.21 is therefore directly applicable to claims which are made against a director for breaches of his fiduciary duties
Payments into court as a means of offering settlement are no longer possible, and cases are commonly settled by acceptance of a Pt 36 offer. Section 10(3) does not apply where an action is settled by acceptance of a Pt 36 offer, and that acceptance is subsequently embodied in a consent order. Such a case is governed by s.10(4). Kazakhstan Kagazy plc v Baglan Abdullayevich Zhunus and others
The fact that C is under a disability does not produce an automatic extension of the period of limitation for bringing a claim under the Human Rights Act 2000, because the limitation period in question is not one provided for by the 1980 Act, but it is likely to be a relevant factor in considering whether to grant an extension of time under the 2000 Act. AP (by his Litigation Friend BA) v Tameside MBC
There are further cases on the question of what is of a new cause of action and whether a new cause of action arises out of the same facts as a previous cause of action - In Blue Tropic Ltd v Chkhartishvili, Abbey Life Trust Securities Limited and Anor v Blake Lapthorn Solicitors, Mastercard Inc and others v Deutsche Bahn AG and others