Insights / News
Insights / News
The applicants applied for a direction to extend the limitation period for bringing professional negligence claims against the respondent.
The application was made under s.1032(3) of the Companies Act 2006 which says:
“The court may give such directions and make such provision as seems just for placing the company and all other persons in the same position (as nearly as may be) as if the company had not been dissolved or struck off the register”.
The court summarised the key principles that apply to such applications:
The court found that dissolution was not the real cause disabling the applicants from bringing the claim. The court also held that – given the court cannot place anyone in a better position – it could not extend limitation for longer than the dissolution period itself. The applicants had not sought a standstill agreement nor issued proceedings even by the date of the hearing itself, and so even if the court extended the limitation period by as long as the dissolution period, limitation would still have already expired. The application was therefore dismissed.
Elaine Palser has an extensive chancery and commercial practice, with an emphasis on contentious trusts and probate, insolvency, commercial disputes and professional negligence. She is recommended as a leading barrister in the Legal 500, Chambers & Partners, and the High Net Worth Guide.
To find out more about Elaine, contact Matt Sale on +44 (0)20 7427 4910 or Chris Rowe on +44 (0)207 427 4911 for a confidential discussion.
News 8 Sep, 2026