header-logo header-logo

08 January 2016
Issue: 7681 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Judgments on judgments

My understanding is that there is no time limit on the enforcement of a money judgment but that a fresh action based on a money judgment is subject to a six-year limitation period. Apart from securing interest on the judgment which would not otherwise be payable, I cannot conceive of any reason why the judgment creditor would wish to bring a fresh action. Is there one?

The Limitation Act 1980, s 24 bars an action to enforce a judgment which became enforceable more than six years previously. However, this bar relates only to enforcement by “a fresh action”; enforcement by way of a charging order, an attachment of earnings order or bankruptcy proceedings are not caught by s 24. The advantage is that, for example, where a judgment has not been satisfied after five years, the judgment creditor could issue a second claim based on the original judgment and thereby start the six-year clock for enforcement running afresh. This might be useful if the judgment debtor has gone missing or, as the first six years are approaching, the judgment creditor does not consider that enforcement

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll