Limitation Act, 1939
| Author | J. Unger |
| Published date | 01 July 1940 |
| Date | 01 July 1940 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1940.tb02730.x |
STATUTES
45
STATUTES
Idmitation
Act,
1939
This
Act,
which came into operation on the
1st
July,
1940.
is
founded
upon the Fifth Interim Report of the Law Revision Committee. Although
there are no revolutionary changes, the Act
is
undoubtedly one of the
most important legislative events of recent years from the point of view
of the legal profession. By the accidents of historical development and
as
the result of judicial legislation this branch of the law displayed a bewil-
dering diversity of rules and was incumbered with artificial distinctions.
The Act simplifies the law and to the extent to which this is possible
establishes uniform rules with regard to conceptions material to all periods
of limitation. The Schedule of repealed enactments attached to the Act,
extending from a section of “An Act concerning Informers” of
31
Eliz. c.
5
to sections of the Arbitration Act,
1934,
indicates the magnitude of the
task confronting the Committee and the degree of consolidation.achieved.
The Report of the Committee excels again as an accurate and elegant
statement of the law and as a fair presentation of the case for reform.
But whereas progress usually lags behind professional opinion, in this
instance the reforms enacted exceed on occasions the recommendations of
the Committee. Every legal system requires
an
efficient machinery of
revision. The creation of
a
Committee commanding the respect of all
branches of the profession has done much to justify the nonexistence of
a Ministry of Justice.
It
is to be hoped that even in the present emergency
the Committee will be able to continue its work, inspired by the bias and
indeed zeal for reform to be expected from a Law Revision Committee
instead of the caution and hesitation to which the Fifth Report sometimes
inclines.
The Act consists of thirty-four sections divided into three parts.
Part
I
enacts periods of limitation, Part
I1
deals with extension of these periods,
Part
I11
contains general provisions. The law as to the limitation of com-
mon law actions has been consolidated and reformed in sections
z
and
3.
Reform of the Statutes
of
Limitation has invariably shortened the periods.
The present Act on the whole continues that practice. This tendency of
reform is not directed against the sanctity of property since the loss of
protection suffered by the old owner is compensated by strengthening the
position of the new owner. The explanation lies probably in the accelera-
tion of movement within organised society due to increased commercial-
isation.
A
more radical reform substituting for the system of fixed periods
flexible periods dependent on the discretion of the court or the moment
of actual or constructive notice of the existence of a claim was rejected.
But it should
be
noted that a reform which almost seems inspired by the
American school of realist jurisprudence should have been given careful
consideration. Such a system would allow the law to be applied with a
greater degree of flexibility and justice in the individual case. But
it
would
involve a sacrifice of certainty which, in the words of the Committee,
is
“the fundamental benefit conferred by statutes of limitation.”
Section
z
introduces
a
uniform period of limitation of
six
years for
actions in simple contract and for all actions in tort. The period of limit-
ation for actions on specialties
is
reduced from twenty to twelve years.
For the purposes of limitation of actions statutes do not fall any more
under the category
of
specialty since a six year period
is
provided for
statutory actions other than for a penalty or forfeiture. The distinction
To continue reading
Request your trial