Limitation Extension Agreement

In light of recent developments in the Treaty Interpretation Act, the Tribunal considered the appropriate approach to the setting of the recitals and their interaction with operational terms. If the recitals and operational provisions of an agreement are clear but inconsistent, operational provisions should in principle be preferred (Re Moon (1886) 17 Q.B.D. 275). However, the courts place greater emphasis on the actual context and the recitals are increasingly being examined to assist in contractual interpretation. It is not possible for the court to extend the limitation period in advance. Moreover, apart from the areas of assault and defamation, there is no room for appreciation to extend the restriction. Therefore, in cases where the restriction is approaching, but the applicant is not willing to initiate proceedings, consideration should be given to concluding a moratorium or status quo agreement. Rights resulting from construction projects often require a review of the statute of limitations. A right must be invoked within the corresponding statute of limitations. The statutory limitation period for contractual rights is six years, with the period beginning to run from the date the means open. When the statute of limitations has expired, the right is prescribed and the defendant will fully defend himself against the law. It surprised many when the Court of Appeal found that it was possible. However, this was a case where the complainant was still grieving.

In Thomas -v- Home Office [2006] EWCA Civ 1355. The Court of Appeal found that the parties could accept additional time, but this agreement, in writing, a document signed by both parties or with the exchange of correspondence. The Tribunal found that the effect of the agreements was suspensive and that, therefore, the procedure had been adopted in a timely manner. The judge`s suggestion that non-status quo agreements constitute a „self-inflicted complication“ in construction disputes was highlighted. He felt that it was much more appropriate when it came to limitation, just expose the procedure and omit it. Parties to the dispute may decide to enter into a status quo agreement if they are about to expire, but the plaintiff is not yet willing to assert his rights (because, for example, the parties are in negotiations that, if successful, would prevent any recourse).