Henriksens Rederi A/S v Centrala Handlu Zagranicznego (CHZ) Rolimpex, The Brede: CA 1974

The court considered when a set off is available to a party. Lord Denning said: ‘It is available whenever the cross-claim arises out of the same transaction as the claim or out of a transaction that is closely related to the claim.’ and ‘In point of principle, when applying the law of limitation, a distinction must be drawn between a matter which is in the nature of a defence and one which is in the nature of a cross-claim. When a defendant is sued, he can raise any matter which is properly in the nature of a defence, without fear of being met by a period of limitation. No defence, properly so called, is subject to a time-bar. But the defendant cannot raise a matter which is properly the subject of a cross-claim, except within the period of limitation allowed for such a claim. A cross-claim may be made in a separate action, or it may be made by way of set off or counterclaim. But on principle it is always subject to a time-bar.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

[1974] QB 233, [1973] 3 All ER 589, [1973] 3 WLR 556

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBritish Anzani (Felixstowe) Ltd v International Marine Management (UK) Ltd ChD 19-Dec-1978
Money expended by a tenant on discharging his landlord’s covenants will in appropriate circumstances operate as a partial or a complete discharge so as to furnish a defence at law to a claim for unpaid rent; and where the tenant has suffered damage . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Equity

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.247754