header-logo header-logo

27 March 2026 / Fred Philpott
Issue: 8155 / Categories: Opinion , Limitation
printer mail-detail

A limitation revolution?

245642
Fred Philpott on how the Supreme Court has transformed the existing law as to limitations

Before 1623, there were no statutory limitation periods. A land ‘owner’ could not be certain that their occupancy of the land could not be challenged by someone alleging that they had better title because of events going back very many decades, if not more. This instability and economic uncertainty in land ownership which was at the centre of the country’s economic system had to be dealt with, and resulted in the first Limitation Act in 1623. The detailed history of this legislation, and an extensive review of other common law jurisdictions, is set out at [41] to [109] in the recent Supreme Court judgment of THG plc v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd [2026] UKSC 6. This decision is a good example of what the Supreme Court can produce that has much wider ramifications than the instant case.

Limitations are not an esoteric area of law. The subject is essential to the proper administration of civil justice (and there are correlations in criminal law). Even in recent history,

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll