[Home] [Databases] [WorldLII] [Search] [Feedback] South African Law Commission

You are here:  SAFLII >> Databases >> South African Law Commission >> Issue Paper >> 23 >> 4. Recent reports by other law reform agencies

[Database Search] [Name Search] [Previous] [Next] [Download] [Help]

4. Recent reports by other law reform agencies

4.1 Limitation of actions has been investigated by several law reform bodies.^[7]

4.2 The following recommendations are popular:

• Provision is made for a core regime, but other enactments outside the core regime are allowed;
• Special provision is not made for public authorities;
• Provision is made for two prescription periods-

1. a primary prescription period, two or three years long, starting from the date when the claimant became aware or could reasonably have become aware of details of a claim and the defendant;
2. a long stop or ultimate prescription period, usually ten years long, starting from the date of the accrual of an action and which comes into operation even if the primary period has not expired;

• It is allowable to contract out of the core regime or modify it by agreement (occasionally subject to unfair contract legislation);
• The court is occasionally allowed a discretion to extend the prescription periods (this discretion is sometimes limited to claims in respect of personal injuries, childhood sexual abuse, or domestic abuse);
• Special rules apply to minors, adult disability, cases of fraud or where the defendant has dishonestly concealed relevant facts;
• Special provision is made occasionally for apportionment of damages, contractual contribution or indemnity and for some maritime claims and taxes.

^[7] See eg the United Kingdom report, the Western Australia report, the Queensland report, the British Columbia Law Institute The ultimate limitation period: Updating the Limitation Act Report No 19 Vancouver: July 2002, as published at www.bcli.org, and publications referred to in these reports.