Of all the ways a good claim can be lost, the saddest is by the calendar. A client comes to us with a strong case and a genuine grievance, and the first question we sometimes have to ask is the one nobody wants answered: is it still in time? Limitation is unforgiving, and it is worth understanding before it becomes urgent.

The basic periods

In West Malaysia, limitation is governed principally by the Limitation Act 1953. The periods that matter most in commercial practice are these:

  • Contract and tort — six years from the date the cause of action accrued (s.6(1)(a)). This covers the great majority of commercial claims: breach of contract, debt, negligence, and most claims for economic loss.
  • Recovery of land — twelve years (s.9(1)).
  • Enforcement of a judgment — twelve years from the date it became enforceable (s.6(3)); arrears of interest, six years.
  • Claims against a public authority — thirty-six months under the Public Authorities Protection Act 1948, a much shorter window that catches people out.

An arbitral claim is treated no differently for limitation purposes: time runs as if the claim were being brought in court (Arbitration Act 2005, s.23). Commencing an arbitration does not pause a clock that has already run.

When does the clock start?

This is where most of the difficulty lies. Time runs from when the cause of action accrues — not when you discovered the problem, and not when the relationship finally broke down. For a breach of contract, that is usually the date of the breach itself, even if the loss came later. For the tort of negligence, it is when damage is suffered.

The distinction matters enormously. A defective piece of work done in 2019 may not reveal its consequences until 2025, but if the claim is framed in contract, the six years may already have run from the breach. This is why the date on which a claim accrues is so often the real battleground in a limitation dispute — and why it should never be assumed.

When the clock can be paused or reset

The Act recognises that a rigid rule would sometimes be unjust, and provides for both postponement and fresh accrual:

  • Fraud, concealment and mistake (s.29). Where the action is based on fraud, or a fact relevant to the claim has been deliberately concealed, or the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake, time does not begin to run until the claimant has discovered it, or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it.
  • Disability (s.24). Where a person entitled to bring an action is under a disability when the cause of action accrues, time may be extended.
  • Acknowledgment and part payment (ss.26–27). If a debtor acknowledges the debt in writing, or makes a part payment, time starts afresh from that acknowledgment or payment. A carelessly worded email can, in this way, revive a claim that was about to die — for better or worse, depending on which side you are on.

Why this is not a do-it-yourself exercise

We publish a limitation checker on this website, and it is genuinely useful for getting an indicative deadline. But it cannot tell you the date your cause of action accrued, whether a shorter special regime applies, whether time was postponed for concealment, or whether an acknowledgment reset the clock. Those are questions of fact and law, and they are exactly the questions on which a limitation defence is won or lost.

The practical lesson is simple. If you think you may have a claim, do not wait for the relationship to be beyond repair before taking advice. The cost of an early conversation is small; the cost of a claim lost to limitation is the whole claim.

This article is general information about the law in West Malaysia as at June 2026 and is not legal advice. Limitation is fact-sensitive; do not rely on any date without advice on your specific matter.