Click the case name for better results:

Bradford and Bingley Plc v Cutler: CA 18 Jan 2008

The borrower fell into arrears when he lost his job. Benefits payments were made toward the debt under the 1992 Act. Those stopped, and the house was repossessed. The property was sold, and the claimant eventually sought to recover the shortfall. They relied on the last benefits payment as acknowledgement of the debt, saying it … Continue reading Bradford and Bingley Plc v Cutler: CA 18 Jan 2008

Phillips and Co (A Firm) v Bath Housing Co-Operative Ltd: CA 11 Dec 2012

The defendant appealed against a order finding it was liable for the fees claimed by its former solicitors. They had said that the claim for costs was barred by limitation. Held: The defendant’s appeal failed; a solicitor’s claim for his costs, billed but not yet fixed by assessment or agreement, fell within the phrase ‘debt … Continue reading Phillips and Co (A Firm) v Bath Housing Co-Operative Ltd: CA 11 Dec 2012

Amantilla Ltd v Telefusion plc: 1987

The case concerned a quantum meruit claim under a building contract. Even though the basis of the claim lies in statute, nonetheless an agreement must be treated as an ‘acknowledgment’ of a ‘liquidated pecuniary claim’ for the purpose of the section, and limitation ran from the date of that agreement. Citations: [1987] 9 ConLR 139 … Continue reading Amantilla Ltd v Telefusion plc: 1987

Bradford and Bingley Plc v Rashid: HL 12 Jul 2006

Disapplication of Without Prejudice Rules The House was asked whether a letter sent during without prejudice negotiations which acknowledged a debt was admissible to restart the limitation period. An advice centre, acting for the borrower had written, in answer to a claim by the lender for the sum still due after the sale of the … Continue reading Bradford and Bingley Plc v Rashid: HL 12 Jul 2006