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lawyers will be urgently reviewing limitation deadlines after the High Court rejected a claim filed nearly 17 months out of date.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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll