Agreement To Extend Limitation Period

While status quo agreements are commonplace in dispute resolution, they are not without complexity. Home / Insights / Prescription deadlines and status quo agreements: how can they affect your rights? Prospective applicants should carefully consider their options as they approach the expiry of a limitation period. Coulson J. noted that status quo agreements are becoming more common and noted that he had “an overwhelming feeling that this may be just another self-inflicted complication.” He suggested that if the restriction is a problem and more time is needed to work on the application, complainants should instead consider proceeding within the statute of limitations and then apply for a stay. A right must be invoked within the corresponding statute of limitations. The statutory limitation period for contractual rights is six years, with the period beginning to run from the date the means open. When the statute of limitations has expired, the right is prescribed and the defendant will fully defend himself against the law. When the applicants entered into the third status quo agreement, they still had more than three weeks to initiate proceedings. If the defendant`s position is correct and the applicants were no longer at the time of the expiry of the third status quo agreement, the applicants risked losing their right of appeal under the conclusion of the agreement. The status quo agreement was intended to preserve the rights not to risk their loss. Complications arise for prescribing purposes when, for example. B the chain of project agreements has a mixture of deeds and contracts and, therefore, the statute of limitations is different.

Any status quo agreement has prevented the parties from adopting a procedure in the currency of this agreement. Therefore, the applicants could not legitimately initiate proceedings until 30 November 2016 without violating the terms of the third status quo agreement. There is a significant difference between the suspension of the term for a given period and the extension of the statute of limitations to a specific date: “I have the impression that the judge has rightly concluded that Parliament has extended the six-month period at the Tribunal and that any agreement not to take a point of delay cannot be binding without the negotiations and not the procedural issue being respected. While the potential applicant must take a risk if an application for an extension of time is made at a later date in cases where negotiations have failed, where both parties were legally represented, it seems unlikely to me that the court will refuse to accept this approach. (Lady Justice Asplin). Rights resulting from construction projects often require a review of the statute of limitations. Parties to the dispute may decide to enter into a status quo agreement if they are about to expire, but the plaintiff is not yet willing to assert his rights (because, for example, the parties are in negotiations that, if successful, would prevent any recourse). If you think you have a reason to act, but time is running out to make a claim, you should seek legal assistance as soon as possible so that your advisors can review your claims and advise on the restriction.

If the time required for action is very short, there are two common steps that you can take: the status quo agreements contained recitals in which it was said that the purpose of the agreements was to extend the period during which the procedure could be issued by the applicants. On the other hand, the operational provisions of the status quo agreements dealt with the “suspension” of time and the “suspension of time”. The applicants referred to the operational provisions and argued that the status quo agreements had resulted in the suspension of the limitation period, while the parties drew attention to the recitals (and certain other factors) and argued that the status quo agreements only lengthened the time frame.