header-logo header-logo

06 March 2019
Issue: 7831 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Family
printer mail-detail

Red light for stale claims

Excusable delays should be ‘measured in weeks’

Family lawyers will be urgently reviewing limitation deadlines after the High Court rejected a claim filed nearly 17 months out of date.

In Cowan v Foreman [2019] EWHC 349 (Fam), Mr Justice Mostyn held that a widow could not bring a claim for financial provision from her husband’s £16m estate because she was out of time.

‘In my judgment, absent highly exceptional factors, in the modern era of civil ligation the limit of excusable delay should be measured in weeks, or, at most, a few months,’ Mostyn J said, in his judgment.

The widow wished to challenge the terms of the late husband’s will, which placed the bulk of his assets into two trusts. She argued that she had been unaware of the six-month time limit in the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 and that both parties had agreed to a time extension, and asked the judge to exercise his discretion.

Mostyn J declined, however, stating in his judgment: ‘Litigation is intrinsically stressful and extremely expensive.

‘The time limit must be there to protect beneficiaries from being vexed by a stale claim, whether or not the estate has been distributed. Similarly, the time limit must be there to spare the court from being burdened with stale claims which should have been made much earlier.’

Richard Kershaw, family law partner at Hunters Solicitors, said Mostyn J’s comments will ‘cause concern and a lot of urgent reviewing of files by lawyers over the next few days as they consider approaching limitation deadlines, and is likely to see a sharp uptick in claims being issued.

‘The judge is well known for his robust comments and shaping of the law. He has made it clear that agreements between lawyers to, effectively, waive the six-month deadline for starting such claims, must stop, saying “I suggest that it is a practice that should come to an immediate end. It is not for the parties to give away time that belongs to the court… the claim should be issued in time and then the court invited to stay the proceedings while the negotiations are pursued”.’

Issue: 7831 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
"There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
back-to-top-scroll