Potential beneficiaries should carefully assess their possibilities when approaching the expiry of a limitation period. Coulson J observed that status quo agreements are becoming more frequent and noted that he had “the overwhelming feeling that they may just be a self-inflicted complication.” He suggested that if the statute of limitations is an issue and it takes longer to work, the claimants should instead consider initiating the proceedings within the statute of limitations and applying for a stay. Under the Limitation Act 1980, legal proceedings must be commenced within specified time limits, but if it is not reasonable or inexpensive, for any reason, to initiate proceedings within that period, the parties may agree, by a standstill agreement, not to adopt them and, if they need them later, not to be prevented by the limitation period otherwise in force. The agreement consists in extending or suspending the limitation period, without the Contracting Parties raising the limitation period as a matter. It`s clear, avoid status quo agreements and make sure you issue within six months of the grant. However, no less than two weeks after Cowan`s surrender, Bhusate v Patel (2019) considered an application under Section 4 of Chief Master Marsh before the High Court. The authorization was granted approximately 25 years after the restriction expired. The facts of this case are beyond the scope of this article, but in summary, the applicant was able to carry out the test in two stages, since she would have been homeless without him and without adequate precaution of her husband`s estate. Standstill agreements are very popular with lawyers, who may withhold their consent not to take stock if a party does not initiate proceedings within the prescribed time limit (statute of limitations). This gives the parties more time to gather their evidence, obtain, if necessary, mediation and avoid the costs of drafting court documents as well as the legal costs themselves….