Terence John Chamberlain, Peter Lawrence Crowley, John David Bradley, Philip Raymond Smith, Christopher John Crowley, William Brian Loftus, Thomas Francis Meagher, Nicholas John Symons, Keith Arthur Bradley,...

The applicants, Terence John Chamberlain and others, sought to appeal orders made by Crispin J in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The dispute concerned the commencement of limitation periods under the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth) and the *Limitation Act 1985* (ACT) in relation to causes of action arising from alleged breaches of contract and tort.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the limitation period for the applicants' claims commenced at the time of purchase or at a later point, and whether an amendment to the statement of claim introducing new causes of action was permissible after the expiry of the relevant limitation periods. The court was required to consider the interplay between the *Trade Practices Act* and the *Limitation Act* in determining when a cause of action accrues for the purposes of statutory time limits.

The court upheld the decision of Crispin J, finding that the limitation periods had expired. The reasoning focused on the commencement of the causes of action at the time of the alleged wrongful conduct or breach, rather than at a later date when the full extent of the loss became apparent or when subsequent events occurred. The court also considered the principles governing amendments to pleadings, particularly in circumstances where new causes of action are introduced after the expiry of statutory limitation periods, concluding that such amendments were not permissible in this instance. The orders made by Crispin J were therefore affirmed.