Does the new R.9(1) limitation period still apply?

Counsel for the appellant contended that the new R.9(1) had made no significant change in the law and that the principles enunciated in. Cropp v. Moreton, supra, and the cases there mentioned, remained applicable. He argued that very special circumstances must be shown before the court will renew a writ where service has not been effected during its currency and where, in the absence of renewel, a defendant would have, as here, an unanswerable defence because of the passing of a statutory limitation period. He asserted that no special circumstances existed here and, indeed, except for dilatory conduct on the part of solicitors, that contention could not be denied. He referred to the many cases in this and English courts which formed the basis for the law enunciated in Cropp v. Moreton and contended that the appeal should succeed.