This was an appeal by the claimant, VAI, from a decision of 30 October 2002 striking out the particulars of claim on the basis that the claim was statute barred. On 5 September 1994 Davy (later taken over by VAI) entered into a contract with Bostock for the supply of gearboxes, couplings and lubrication systems. The equipment was shipped to India and installed in July 1996. Two years later on, 31 August 1998, part of the equipment suffered a catastrophic failure. Replacement parts were installed that were not successful. On 1 February 2002 a claim was brought under the terms of the warranty and an express term in the guarantee. The defendants argued that the claim be struck out as being out of time. At first instance the judge agreed that the claim was statute barred. The claimant appealed.

*Full case details VAI Industries (UK) Limited vs Bostock & Bramley & Ors [2003] EWCA Civ 1069, 23 July 2003, Court of Appeal
The claimants argued that they were not statute barred because (1) they were bringing a specific claim for breach of the warranty, (2) a claim under the guarantee based on the argument that any latent defect found within three years from the date of acceptance be made good, and (3) there was a new contract for a replacement of the parts.