The Court of Appeal (CoA) has handed down an important judgment (in Siniakovich v Hassan-Soudey & ors [2026] EWCA Civ 215) addressing whether a failure to pay the correct court fee for the issue of a claim form means that the action is not “brought” for limitation purposes.
This is the first time that the CoA has considered this issue, which has generated inconsistent High Court decisions. The CoA concluded that an action is brought (and thus time stopped for the purposes of the Limitation Act 1980) when a claim form is delivered to the court provided that a fee is proffered or paid (or a help with fees form lodged), even if that fee is not correct with reference to the Civil Proceedings Fees Order 2008.
In this case the CoA held that the Claimant (and Respondent to the appeal) failed to pay the correct court fee upon filing a claim for libel, malicious falsehood, and other torts. This led to the High Court refusing to issue the claim until the correct fee was paid, by which point the limitation period had expired. The Claimant then applied to backdate the issue of the claim and/or for an order deeming the claim to have been brought on the earlier date. The CoA allowed the appeal against the decision to grant that application, holding that the Judge had no jurisdiction to backdate the issue of the claim form or change the date on which an action is brought. But following its conclusion on the relationship between the payment of court fees and the bringing of proceedings, the CoA accepted that the Claimant’s libel and malicious falsehood claims are not time-barred.
The CoA also held that, where a claimant files particulars of claim with a claim form, the courts must read these documents together when determining what relief is sought and therefore the correct court fee.
Aidan Wills acted for the Second and Third Appellants, instructed by Tim Smith and Eva Wallace of DWF Law LLP.