In that case, the court found the promise to pay on demand meant that actual demand for performance was an express condition precedent to the duty to perform. Doing so renders the statute of limitations ineffective and is contrary to policy considerations. Statutes of limitations are designed to prevent recovery on stale demands. 66 Ill. App. We therefore decline to affirm the trial court's judgment because we find it undermines the purpose of a statute of limitations.
Statutes of limitations require diligence in initiating actions.
Plaintiff is only able to claim inadvertence in his failure to bill defendant. He was able to legally demand payment after completing the work, and the statute of limitations began to run at that time, or more than five years before plaintiff filed suit. For these reasons, we vacate the trial court's judgment and dismiss plaintiff's action with prejudice.