This Practice Note considers the circumstances when a court may allow the parties to proceedings to be changed (in particular, a new party being added (joined) or substituted for another party) following a relevant period of limitation having expired (or potentially expired). It refers to section 35 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) and considers the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), in particular CPR 17 and CPR 19.6, concerning the addition of new parties. It should be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Limitation—amendments to statements of case, set-offs and counterclaims, which similarly addresses amendments to statements of case following the end of a relevant limitation period, but with particular focus on the addition or substitution of new causes of action after the end of a relevant limitation period (as well as setting out the position in respect of limitation and counterclaims). For summaries of illustrative decisions, see Practice Notes: • Limitation—illustrative decisions • Limitation and amendments—illustrative decisions (pre-May 2025) [Archived] Practitioners should

This Practice Note considers the circumstances when a court may allow amendments to a party’s statement of case following a relevant period of limitation having expired (or potentially expired). It refers to section 35 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) and considers the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules, in particular CPR 17.4, concerning the addition of new causes of action. It also specifically addresses limitation issues relevant to counterclaims. For guidance relevant to the determination of limitation periods under LA 1980 and illustrative decisions, see Practice Notes: • Limitation Act 1980—general application • Limitation—the principal limitation periods • Limitation—illustrative decisions • Limitation and extensions of time—key and illustrative decisions [Archived] See also Practice Notes: Amending a statement of case—introduction and Amending a statement of case—permission to amend for general information on amending statements of case when limitation is not in issue. Finally, practitioners should note that the numbering for CPR 19 was amended with effect from 6 April 2023. In particular, CPR 19.5 was moved to CPR 19.6 (with

This Practice Note outlines the relevant law where there are issues of limitation in the context of a claim against a constructive trustee, including against company directors and other parties in disputes where a breach of fiduciary duty is alleged. It considers section 21(1) of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) and the circumstances when that will be applicable. For general guidance on constructive trusts, including the circumstances when a constructive trust might arise, see Practice Notes: • Constructive trusts • Civil fraud—heads of claim • Claims against directors—key considerations for dispute resolution practitioners • Proprietary remedies—following and tracing • Claim for knowing receipt • Claim for dishonest assistance Section 21 of the Limitation Act 1980 LA 1980, s 21(1) and LA 1980, s 21(3) provide that: ‘(1) No period of limitation prescribed by this Act shall apply to an action by a beneficiary under a trust, being an action: (a) in respect of any fraud or fraudulent breach of trust to which the trustee was a party or privy; or (b) to recover from the trustee

This Practice Note provides guidance on the limitation periods for breach of contract claims pursuant to the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980). It should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: • Limitation Act 1980—general application, which details the general principles for calculating limitation periods pursuant to LA 1980, including when time runs from and stops running • Limitation—the principal limitation periods, which provides an overview of the key limitation periods for disputes. As well as including high-level details relevant to breach of contract claims, it may assist in relation to other claims that could apply concurrently on the facts For more general guidance relating to breach of contract and debt claims, see: • Contractual breach damages and remedies—overview • Debt claims—overview General Pursuant to LA 1980, s 5, the limitation period for bringing a claim for breach of contract is: • six years from the date of breach of a 'simple contract', meaning one which is not under seal or a contract of record (Gould v Johnson). Broadly, this includes most agreements made between parties

This Practice Note considers section 32(2) of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), which provides that, for the purposes of LA 1980, s 32(1), the deliberate commission of a breach of duty in circumstances in which it is unlikely to be discovered for some time amounts to deliberate concealment of the facts involved in that breach. Where it applies, the limitation period does not begin to run until the claimant has discovered the deemed concealment, or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it. This time begins to run when the claimant knows, or could with reasonable diligence know enough to recognise that it has a worthwhile claim. For an overview of LA 1980, s 32 and guidance on issues common to each limb of the provision, including reasonable diligence—see Practice Note: Limitation—fraud, deliberate concealment and mistake. See also the following Practice Notes for related LA 1980, s 32 content: • Limitation—fraud under section 32(1)(a) • Limitation—deliberate breach of duty under section 32(2) • Limitation—mistake under section 32(1)(c) For additional limitation content,

Dispute Resolution analysis: This case concerned an appeal against a finding at trial that the claim was not time-barred by reason of deliberate concealment of facts relevant to the claimant’s right of action within the meaning of section 32(1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980. The claim arose from the wrongful removal from a bank account of the proceeds of a portfolio of investments and securities over which the defendant effectively exercised control on behalf of the claimant. The judge held that a limitation defence did not succeed because there had been deliberate concealment of relevant facts, and the claimant could not, with reasonable diligence, have discovered the concealment at any time before the date six years before the commencement of the action.

This Practice Note considers section 32(1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) which may postpone the running of time where any fact relevant to the claimant’s right of action has been deliberately concealed from the claimant by the defendant. Where it applies, the limitation period does not begin to run until the claimant has discovered the concealment, or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it. In deliberate concealment cases, this means that time begins to run when the claimant knows, or could with reasonable diligence know enough to recognise that it has a worthwhile claim. For an overview of LA 1980, s 32 and guidance on issues common to each limb of the provision, including reasonable diligence—see Practice Note: Limitation—fraud, deliberate concealment and mistake. See also the following Practice Notes for related LA 1980, s 32 content: • Limitation—fraud under section 32(1)(a) • Limitation—deliberate breach of duty under section 32(2) • Limitation—mistake under section 32(1)(c) For additional limitation content, see: Limitation—overview, in particular Practice Notes: • Limitation Act 1980—general application • Limitation—when

This Practice Note considers the different ways in which limitation periods may be postponed and/or extended pursuant to Part II of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980). In particular, this Practice Note addresses the position in respect of children under 18 years old and the acknowledgment or part payment of debts by a defendant, as well as providing links to detailed guidance on other key provisions concerning postponements and/or extensions to limitation under LA 1980. Extension or exclusion of time limits Part II of the LA 1980, ss 28-34 provides a number of ways in which the limitation periods prescribed by LA 1980, Part I might be extended or excluded. In particular, it provides that the ordinary time limits (as set out in Practice Note: Limitation—the principal limitation periods) might not apply if: • the claimant has a disability, ie is under 18 years old and/or is of unsound mind as defined by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) (LA 1980, ss 28, 28A) • there is a fresh accrual of action following

This Practice Note considers section 32(1)(a) of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), which may apply where the action is based on the fraud of the defendant. Where it applies, the limitation period does not begin to run until the claimant has discovered the fraud, or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it. This means that time starts when the claimant knows, or could with reasonable diligence know enough to advance and plead a properly arguable fraud claim. This Practice Note should be read together with the overview on LA 1980, s 32, which provides guidance on issues common to each limb of the provision, including reasonable diligence—see Practice Note: Limitation—fraud, deliberate concealment and mistake. For related LA 1980, s 32 guidance, see Practice Notes: • Limitation—deliberate concealment of relevant facts under section 32(1)(b) • Limitation—deliberate breach of duty under section 32(2) • Limitation—mistake under section 32(1)(c) For additional limitation content, see: Limitation—overview, in particular Practice Notes: • Limitation Act 1980—general application • Limitation—when will it end? • Limitation—the principal limitation periods • Limitation—extensions

This Practice Note provides an overview of section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980). It explains the structure and practical operation of LA 1980, s 32 and addresses issues that arise across fraud, deliberate concealment and mistake cases, including approaches to reasonable diligence, pleading, agency. For detailed guidance on the individual limbs of LA 1980, s 32, see Practice Notes: • Limitation—fraud under section 32(1)(a) • Limitation—deliberate concealment of relevant facts under section 32(1)(b) • Limitation—deliberate breach of duty under section 32(2) • Limitation—mistake under section 32(1)(c) For additional limitation content, see: Limitation—overview, in particular Practice Notes: • Limitation Act 1980—general application • Limitation—when will it end? • Limitation—the principal limitation periods • Limitation—extensions of time under the Limitation Act 1980 • Limitation—illustrative decisions What is the effect of section 32? LA 1980, s 32 postpones the running of any applicable limitation period where: • the action is based on the fraud of the defendant (LA 1980, s 32(1)(a)) • any fact relevant to the claimant’s right of action has been deliberately

This Practice Note summarises illustrative decisions dated post-October 2025 which are relevant to the determination of limitation periods pursuant to the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980). It is intended to provide a broad sense of the diverse issues which can arise and how they might be approached by the courts, focusing on cases which are most likely to be of interest to a dispute resolution practitioner. For summaries of decisions relevant to LA 1980 dated before October 2025, see Practice Notes: • Limitation and extensions of time—key and illustrative decisions [Archived] • Limitation and amendments—illustrative decisions (pre-May 2025) [Archived] For further information on LA 1980 and links to practical content which address the limitation periods for claims most likely to be relevant to a dispute resolution practitioner, see: Limitation—overview. Case details and analysis Judgment date Case summary Chancery Division (Business List) Francis v Silver Law LLP [2026] EWHC 2191 (Ch) 26 August 2026 Former clients of Silver Law LLP sought a direction under section 1032(3) of the Companies Act 2006 (as applied to a limited liability partnership

This Practice Note considers the alternative three-year limitation period provided for in section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), which extends the limitation period based on the claimant’s knowledge of relevant facts for bringing a claim. It sets out when the provision applies, the relevant knowledge required and the concept of the claimant being bound by constructive knowledge of certain facts. It also explains the long-stop period of 15 years in LA 1980, s 14B for negligence actions not involving personal injuries. For detailed guidance on all the considerations that might apply when dealing with construction disputes and building-defect cases, see: Defects in construction projects—overview. For broader guidance on LA 1980 and links to related practical guidance, see: Limitation—overview. Background The limitation period for an action founded on tort is six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued pursuant to LA 1980, s 2. For claims in negligence, the cause of action accrues when damage first occurs rather than the date (if later) on which it is discovered by the claimant. For further