Substitution of new parties at the end of a limitation period

In Sheldon Gary Adelson and Las Vegas Sands Corp v Associated Newspapers Limited [2007] EWCA Civ 701, the Court of Appeal sought to clarify some difficult procedural points regarding CPR 19.5(3) and CPR 17.4 concerning the substitution of new parties in existing proceedings for a party named in mistake, after the expiry of the relevant limitation period.

The claimants sought to amend their statement of case by the addition of new claims and substitution of four claimants in place of the original two after the limitation period had expired. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the lower court to refuse the application, but for different reasons. The appeal failed because the claimants had not proved there had been any "mistake" for the purposes of CPR 19.5(3).

The case provides clarity as to the test to be used in determining if a "mistake" has been made for the purposes of CPR 19.5(3) and CPR 17.4. It also highlights the possibility in defamation/malicious falsehood claims of an alternative remedy to the problem by asking the court to use its discretion under section 32A of the Limitation Act 1980.