Agia v Skipton Building Society [2024] EW Misc 14 (CC) (22 January 2024)

Agia v Skipton Building Society [2024] EW Misc 14 (CC) (22 January 2024)

The limitation period for a claim to recover a bank deposit runs from the date of the first written demand for repayment, regardless of whether the demand was honoured or refused; a subsequent demand does not restart the limitation period. The claim is statute barred as more than six years elapsed since the first...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] EW Misc 14 (CC)
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Mr Tajudeen Adigun Agia; Defendant/respondent: Skipton Building Society
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Decision to Strike Out Claim as Statute Barred
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; lower court's decision upheld.
Legal Topics
Limitation Period, Banker Customer Relationship, Accrual of Cause of Action, Strike Out Applications
Banking Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Limitation Period Banker Customer Relationship Accrual of Cause of Action Strike Out Applications

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Tajudeen Adigun Agia

Claimant/appellant

Skipton Building Society

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Decision to Strike Out Claim as Statute Barred

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When does the limitation period begin to run for a bank deposit account claim?
  2. 2 Does a fresh demand restart the limitation period for repayment of a bank deposit?
  3. 3 Is refusal of demand necessary for limitation to run under the Limitation Act 1980, s.6?

Ratio Decidendi

The limitation period for a claim to recover a bank deposit runs from the date of the first written demand for repayment, regardless of whether the demand was honoured or refused; a subsequent demand does not restart the limitation period. The claim is statute barred as more than six years elapsed since the first demand in 1990.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; lower court's decision upheld.

Orders

  • Appellant's appeal dismissed.
  • Decision of DJ Skalskyj-Reynolds to strike out the claim as statute barred upheld.