Vilca & Ors v Xstrata Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 27 (QB) (19 January 2018)

Vilca & Ors v Xstrata Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 27 (QB) (19 January 2018)

The claimants' claims under Peruvian law are barred by limitation because the original claim form and particulars, pleaded under English law, did not interrupt the prescription period for Peruvian law claims under Article 1996(3) of the Peruvian Civil Code. The amendments introducing Peruvian law claims were made after the expiry of the two-year limitation period and do not relate back. There was no tacit or express waiver by the defendants of the limitation defence.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 27 (QB)
Parties
Claimants: Daniel Alfredo Condori Vilca & Ors; First Defendant: Xstrata Limited; Second Defendant: Compania Minera Antapaccay S. A. (Formerly Xstrata Tintaya S. A.)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil (tort/delict) / Preliminary Issue Judgment on Limitation (prescription) Under Peruvian Law
Outcome
Claimants' claims under Peruvian law are barred by limitation (prescription).
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Prescription (extinctive), Foreign Law Application, Rome II Regulation, Waiver of Limitation Defence
Private International Law Tort Law Comparative Law Civil Procedure Limitation of Actions Prescription (extinctive) Foreign Law Application Rome II Regulation +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Alfredo Condori Vilca & Ors

Claimants

Xstrata Limited

First Defendant

Compania Minera Antapaccay S. A. (Formerly Xstrata Tintaya S. A.)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (tort/delict) / Preliminary Issue Judgment on Limitation (prescription) Under Peruvian Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' claims under Peruvian law are barred by limitation (prescription)
  2. 2 Whether service of the original English law claim form and particulars interrupted the limitation period for Peruvian law claims under Peruvian law
  3. 3 Whether amendments to pleadings introducing Peruvian law claims relate back to the original claim for limitation purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' claims under Peruvian law are barred by limitation because the original claim form and particulars, pleaded under English law, did not interrupt the prescription period for Peruvian law claims under Article 1996(3) of the Peruvian Civil Code. The amendments introducing Peruvian law claims were made after the expiry of the two-year limitation period and do not relate back. There was no tacit or express waiver by the defendants of the limitation defence.

Court Disposition

Claimants' claims under Peruvian law are barred by limitation (prescription).

Orders

  • Claims under Peruvian law dismissed as time-barred.
  • No waiver of limitation by defendants.