Dismiss Notice
Hey Guest, make sure to follow us on Twitter! Say hi and we'll be sure to follow back!

Statute Barred?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by David M, Oct 17, 2007.

  1. David M

    David M UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    Posts: 2 Likes: 0
    Hi there,

    I'm wondering if anyone can offer me some advice on the following matter:

    An associate of mine (Mr. X) recently secured a civil judgement against someone (Mr. Y) who owed him a very large sum of money. Since securing his judgement a claim (by Mr. Z) has been made against Mr. X relating to a judgement that was given in favour of Mr. Z in 1999. Effectively Mr. Z has showed up after almost 8 years and requested the judgement debt from Mr. X's winnings be directly paid to Mr. Z. As a result an interim Third Party Debt Order was made by the court.

    Mr. X has argued that Mr. Z is not entitled to the judgement money because his claim is Statute Barred under the Limitations Act 1980. However, the solicitors acting for Mr. Z are referring to a case from 1992 in which a judge ordered that a debt be paid 11 years after it was originally made, thus disregarding the Statute Barred rule. Their justification for this was a small amendment which they say was made in 1995 to the Limitations Act, stating that "Action" (i.e. a claim/proceedings) could not be bought forward after a six year period but that the "Execution" (i.e. the recovery) of judgement orders could.


    As a result Mr. X stands to lose money that is owed to him. Mr. X is adamant that the judgement obtained by Mr. Z in the first place way back in 1999 was falsely awarded, but Mr. X never appealed the decision as Mr. Z has never tried to enforce his judgement - until now. Mr. X now has little chance of launching a successful appeal against the existing judgement on him from 1999 (and has been told so by a District Judge) and therefore stands to lose the money that was awarded to him in the proceedings he won against Mr. Y. Mr. X is adamant there is a "collusion" taking place - a subject UK Courts are very sensitive to - but is going to have difficultly proving this. His only hope lies in the claim being Statute Barred (an argument Mr. Z and his solicitors APPEAR to have overcome) - what can be done?

    Surely one case in 1992 does not render the entire Statute Barred law insignificant. Is anyone aware of another case or precedent where the Execution of a Judgement has NOT been awarded on the basis of it being Statute Barred post-1995?

    Many thanks in advance for anyone willing to offer their knowledge on this matter.

    Posted: Oct 17, 2007 By: David M Member since: Oct 17, 2007
  2. Antonia @limeone.com

    Antonia @limeone.com UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    Posts: 1,765 Likes: 141
    There is a judgment in your scenario which stands and can be recovered. The defendant needs to take legal advice to see if they can set aside the original judgment on the grounds it was not collected in the 6 year period.

    This appears to have at least been considered by the court who have looked at the case law and made their decision in relation to enforcement of this judgment. The only way forward, if the court has ruled on this it to take advice on appeal routes. Much depends on the amounts involved as well as the law here, appeals are expensive unless there is a clearly incorrect decision.

    The judgment, being an order of the court has to be stayed or set aside by the court and problems occur if the creditor now has his only opportunity to collect on the judgment.
    Posted: Oct 17, 2007 By: Antonia @limeone.com Member since: Jan 28, 2006