Catherine Addy KC and Rebecca Page KC consider the Supreme Court decision in THG Plc v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd [2026] UKSC 6 and its wider impact on limitation periods for claims under the Insolvency Act 1986, including s.238 to s.241, 339 to 342 and s.423 to 425.

On 25 February 2026 the Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision in THG Plc v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd [2026] UKSC 6. By a majority of 4 to 1 it held that no period of limitation applies to claims for unfair prejudice under s.994 to 996 of the Companies Act 2006 (‘CA 2006’), overturning the decision of the Court of Appeal.

That, in itself, is a highly significant development in the field of company law. But the impact of the decision does not stop there.

First, logically, the reasoning of the majority in relation to s.8 and s.9 of the Limitation Act 1980 (‘1980 Act’) would appear to be equally applicable at least to claims under s. 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (‘IA1986’) (transactions defrauding creditors) and potentially to those under s.238/339 for transactions at an undervalue (‘TUV’) and s239/340 for preferences.

Second, the majority expressly stated (at [155]) that the decisions in Priory Garage (Walthamstow) Ltd [2001] BPIR 144 (‘Priory Garage’) which concerned s.238-241 of the IA1986 and Hill v Spread Trustee Co Ltd [2007] 1 WLR 2404 concerning s.423 IA 1986 (‘Hill v Spread Trustee’) were wrongly decided as regards the application of a 6-year period of limitation under s. 9 of the 1980 Act.

Third, the majority said that it was satisfied (at [117]) that insofar as the parties in Priory Garage and the court “perhaps” in Hill v Spread Trustee relied on the view that an ‘action upon a specialty’ under s.8 of the 1980 Act is wide enough to include any claim which can only be brought under a statutory provision, they were wrong to do so.

The Supreme Court has not, however, overruled Priory Garage or Hill v Spread Trustee. How, then, are limitation periods for TUV, preference and s.423 claims, as well as other claims under the IA 1986, to be approached in this new landscape?

Read the full article on THG Plc v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd here.