Not a member yet? Register now and get started.

lock and key

Sign in to your account.

Account Login

Forgot your password?

Standstill Agreement Limitation Precedent

09 Oct Posted by in Uncategorized | Comments
Standstill Agreement Limitation Precedent

Issues for which the parties refuse to agree on a standstill agreement A standstill agreement can be concluded in two ways: a standstill agreement is a contract and is subject to the same rules as other contracts. Although, in the most recent cases, these are disputes regarding the terms of the respective standstill agreements, problems may also arise during the conclusion of the contract. The agreement may be oral, but as a general rule, the parties agree not to be bound until the agreement is in writing, often using the phrase “contrarian”. The second scenario concerns claims against third parties. Defendants should be cautious before entering into standstill agreements with claimants without adequate legal information, if they may have a right against a third party that cannot be invoked under the Civil Liability Act 1978. They may find themselves in an impossible situation if they are unable to convince the third party to enter into a standstill agreement, as was the case in Nomura International Plc v Granada Group Ltd. Withdrawing a statute of limitations from a defendant is an abuse by initiating a proceeding in which you are unable to properly formulate the claim and in which you do not intend to move the complaint forward. A right must be claimed within the limitation period. The statutory limitation period for contractual rights is six years, the period being to run from the date on which the plea was formed. When the limitation period has expired, the right is time-barred and the defendant has a full defence against the right. Under the Limitation Act 1980, legal proceedings must be commenced within specified time limits, but if it is not reasonable or inexpensive, for any reason, to initiate proceedings within that period, the parties may agree, by a standstill agreement, not to adopt them and, if they need them later, not to be prevented by the limitation period otherwise in force. The agreement consists in extending or suspending the limitation period, without the Contracting Parties raising the limitation period as a matter.

If the defendant becomes aware of an error, the court may deny him the opportunity to benefit from his unscrupulous conduct. This is the case when the defendant`s lawyer or insurer deliberately encourages the plaintiff to mistakenly believe that he or she has reached an impasse with the right defendant (see The Stolt Loyalty). It was essential that, although the parties had extended the scope of the standstill agreement to other potential claims through agreed amendments, they had never explicitly agreed on an extension of the standstill period. . . .


Comments are closed.