INSERT, AFTER THE REFERENCE TO NOTE 63: The period of delay which will bar a claim to specific performance is to be judged by such equitable principles, and not by analogy with section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980 [NOTE 64].

NOTE 62:  ADD: Any suggestion that a claimant can delay for years in bringing his suit for specific performance is therefore contrary to well-established principle:  see P & O Nedlloyd B.V. v Arab Metals Co. [2006] EWCA Civ 1717, at [50] per Moore-Bick LJ.

ADD NEW NOTE 64: If a statutory limitation provision (properly interpreted) applies to a claim, then equity will apply it in obedience to the statute; and even where the limitation period does not apply to the claim (because the claim is for an exclusively equitable remedy) the limitation will be applied by analogy if the equitable remedy is "correspondent to the remedy at law":  see P & O Nedlloyd B.V. v Arab Metals Co. [2006] EWCA Civ 1717, at [34]-[38] per Moore-Bick LJ.  However, the remedy of specific performance is not correspondent to any common law remedy; so that no period of limitation applies by analogy:  ibid, at [44]-[52] per Moore-Bick LJ.  Whether a statutory period of limitation should be applied by analogy to claims for monetary relief in lieu of specific performance remains uncertain.