An applicant seeking an extension of the limitation period must lead adequate evidence explaining the delay, including evidence from or about a former solicitor who failed to commence proceedings; it is not sufficient to simply assert that a solicitor was instructed but failed to act. The adequacy of the explanation and the degree of prejudice to the respondent must be weighed together in determining whether it is fair and just to grant the extension — the weaker the explanation, the greater the need to show little prejudice. Prejudice to a third party that could be joined for contribution is also a relevant consideration.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 11 later cases that cite this judgment.