Outside the limitation period, which of the following is a valid ground to add or substitute a party?

• A. The party is to be substituted for a party who was named in the claim form in mistake
• B. The claim cannot properly be carried on unless the new party is added or substituted
• C. The original party has died or had a bankruptcy order made against them, and their interest or liability has passed to the new party
• D. All of the above

Answer: (D)

When adding or substituting a party after the limitation period, the court looks for a valid ground that keeps the claim alive against the correct person or entity. All of these scenarios are recognized grounds for doing so.

Mistaken naming of a party allows the court to substitute the actual party intended in the claim form. This fixes a misnomer so the remedy is pursued against the right person without forcing the claimant to start over.

If the claim cannot be properly carried on without the new party, the court may add or substitute to ensure the dispute can be resolved. This prevents injustice where the real defendant (or necessary participant) isn’t properly before the court.

When the original party has died or a bankruptcy order has been made, and their interest or liability passes to another party, substitution ensures the correct successor is bound by or can defend the claim.

So, outside the limitation period, these grounds—correcting misnaming, ensuring the claim can proceed, and substituting a successor on death or insolvency—are all valid, making all of the above correct. The court will exercise its discretion to permit the change, typically balancing fairness and potential prejudice to others.