Standstill Agreement Judicial Review
Category : Uncategorized
If the parties are unable to agree on a standstill agreement or are in the process of negotiation between the parties, you may be required to issue a protection form if there is a risk that your claim will be time-barred in accordance with one of the above deadlines. Standstill agreements are common in litigation and result in the inhibition or extension of the limitation period. The limitation period is the period (under the contract or the law) within which the claim can be invoked in court. Different types of claims have different limitation periods. It is likely that an appeal that will be brought in court after the expiry of the limitation period will probably be withheld as prescribed. As a result, applicants often propose standstill agreements in order to create more time for transaction interviews or to have their claims reviewed/advised without being under pressure to decide whether to initiate legal proceedings. A standstill agreement is an agreement between potential parties involved in a dispute to effectively extend or suspend a limitation period and has become a daily occurrence in civil matters, as they give parties more time to deal with all pre-claimant requirements before a right is invoked. Elton John sings “I`m Still Standing” on his Farewell Yellow Brick Road tour, and it appears that the parties to the civil lawsuit in England and Wales are still in place following a recent Court of Appeal decision supporting restraint agreements. “It is undeniable that this is often the right way to go [opening proceedings within six months and then requesting an adjournment] but, for my part, I do not want to go as far as the judge and say that there is no room for status quo agreements in cases that are often very painful and sensitive and where a decision must be made, while the grief is still very raw and emotionally high. In such circumstances, the issue of procedure, instead of creating a safety net in the absence of an agreement, may lead to a hardening of recruitments and a focus on litigation, with the resulting cost of succession and delays in its distribution. Given the long-standing belief that the standstill agreements extended the limitation period by 6 months, this case created uncertainty among the profession.
Mostyn was aware of this when commenting: a little comfort is available for controversial estate practitioners. First, the judge considered that the applicant`s claim was weak, which probably made him less willing to neglect the expiry of the limitation period. Second, the above quotation, even if the judgment does not indicate this, shows that the judge was influenced by the fact that the judgment was agreed after the end of the limitation period and that the deadlock elapsed some time before the proceedings were closed. . . .