The Court of Appeal has halted the expanding scope for correcting the defendant party after limitation expires, reports Sarah Crowther
- A ‘mistake’ for the purposes of s 35(6)(a), Limitation Act 1980 means a mistake as to the name of the party, not its identity.
- A narrow test is applied to s 35(6)(b) when determining what constitutes ‘a claim already made in the original action’.
- The Court of Appeal was bound by Adelson v Associated Newspapers Ltd, but permission to appeal to the Supreme Court has been granted.
The Court of Appeal has recently overruled the influential obiter comments of Mr Justice Leggatt, as he then was, in Insight Group Ltd v Kingston Smith [2012] EWHC 3644 (QB), halting the increasing generosity afforded to claimants seeking to substitute defendants after expiry of limitation (Adcamp LLP v Office Properties Pl Ltd (in liquidation) and others; BDB Pitmans LLP (now known as Broadfield Law UK LLP) and another company v Lee and another company [2026] EWCA Civ 50).
Background
Office Properties and Lee concerned professional negligence
