Limitation of Actions Consultation - Law Commission

15.57 We provisionally recommend that the long stop period under the core regime
should apply to a redemption action brought by a mortgagor who is not in
possession of the property, so that the limitation period for such an action would
be 10 years (or, under our alternative proposal for land related actions, 12 years)
running from the date on which the mortgagor ceased to be in possession. We ask
consultees whether they agree. (Paragraph 13.134).
15.58 We make no provisional recommendation as to whether a mortgagee should
continue to be entitled to deduct from the proceeds of sale of the mortgaged
property arrears of interest whose recovery is statute barred. We ask consultees
whether they agree that we should make no such recommendation in this project.
(Paragraph 13.135).
15.59 Consultees are asked whether they agree with our provisional view that actions to
recover arrears of rent should fall within our core regime (that is, there would be
an initial limitation period of three years from discoverability with a long-stop of 10
years from when the rent should have been paid). (Paragraph 13.136).
12 ACTIONS ON A JUDGMENT
15.60 Our provisional view is that actions on a judgment should be subject to the core
regime. We ask consultees whether they agree and, if they do not, to say why not.
(Paragraph 13.138).
13 ACTIONS ON AN ARBITRATION AWARD
15.61 We provisionally recommend that actions on an arbitration award should be
subject to the core regime. Consultees are asked if they agree and, if they do not,
to say why not. (Paragraph 13.139).
14 ACTIONS ON A STATUTE
15.62 We ask consultees whether they agree with our provisional recommendation that
actions on a statute should be subject to our core regime. If consultees do not
agree, we ask them to say why not. (Paragraph 13.141).
15 ACTIONS AGAINST PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
15.63 Our provisional view is that, as under the present law, no special protection in
limitations law should be given to public authorities. Where the core regime
would apply to any other defendant, it should therefore apply in the same way to
actions against public authorities. Do consultees agree? (Paragraph 13.153).
16 SHOULD THE CORE REGIME APPLY TO PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION
459 OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1985?
15.64 Our provisional view is that the core regime should apply to proceedings under
section 459 of the Companies Act 1985. 5
However, we would welcome
consultees’ views on this in the light of the difficulties highlighted in paragraphs
5 We would envisage that the approach to section 459 proceedings would apply also to
analogous proceedings, such as a contributory’s petition to wind up a company on just and
equitable grounds.
412