High Court warning to lawyers over fair treatment of litigants in person – Litigation Futures

Posted October 10th, 2016 in case management, delay, litigants in person, news, practice directions, service by sally

‘The High Court has issued a warning to lawyers over dumping legal documents on litigants in person (LiPs) at the door of the court.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 6th October 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Sino Channel Asia Ltd v Dana Shipping and Trading Pte Singapore and another – WLR Daily

Posted June 8th, 2016 in arbitration, contracts, jurisdiction, law reports, service, third parties by sally

Sino Channel Asia Ltd v Dana Shipping and Trading Pte Singapore and another [2016] EWHC 1118 (Comm)

‘The charterer engaged a third party company to arrange contracts which would be concluded in the charterer’s name but performed by the third party. Through the third party, the charterer entered into a contract of affreightment with the owner. The principal contact point between the owner and the charterer was a junior employee at the third party company. When a dispute arose the owner appointed an arbitrator and e-mailed their notice of arbitration to the third party’s employee, calling on the charterer to appoint their arbitrator. The charterer having not responded, the owner’s arbitrator, in accordance with the terms of the contract, proceeded as the sole arbitrator and made an award in favour of the owner. The charterer applied, pursuant to section 72(1)(b)(c) of the Arbitration Act 1996, for a declaration that the award had been made without jurisdiction, on the ground that the third party’s employee had not had authority to accept service of notice of commencement of arbitration proceedings on the charterer’s behalf and that service on him had not been in accordance with section 76 of the 1996 Act. The owner contended that the employee had had actual implied authority and/or ostensible authority to receive notice of arbitration on the charterer’s behalf.’

WLR Daily, 20th May 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Out of time and out of luck: extending time for service out of the jurisdiction – Hardwicke Chambers

‘The recent decision of Cox J in Foran v Secret Surgery Ltd and others is a salutary tale emphasising the strict approach of the courts to applications to extend time for service of the claim form. Here, the fact that service had to be effected out of the jurisdiction did not avail the claimant, with the result that her claim was time-barred against three of the four defendants.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 24th May 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Practical advice on forfeiture – Hardwicke Chambers

‘The tail-end of 2015 threw up one of those London bus-type quirks where in less than a fortnight I acted for a landlord, a lessee and a mortgagee in three cases concerning, at least in part, the issues of (a) service of forfeiture proceedings, and (b) the defendant’s non-attendance at the first hearing at which a possession order was made.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 19th April 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Don’t Assume you can Serve the Solicitors! – Zenith PI Blog

Posted April 19th, 2016 in appeals, civil procedure rules, news, service, solicitors by sally

‘The Defendants appealed against a master’s order that service of a claim form by the Claimants on their solicitors amounted to good service. The Claimants applied for service by an alternative method under CPR 6.15.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 19th April 2016

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

High Court Confirms that the Insolvency Rules Can Waive Defects in Service of a Bankruptcy Petition – Littleton Chambers

Posted February 24th, 2016 in bankruptcy, news, regulations, service by sally

‘The detailed procedural requirements of the Insolvency Rules 1986 make inadvertent breach a perpetual possibility. Debtors often try to take steps to frustrate the process, and may rely on such breaches to do so. A common tactic is to evade personal service. The Court is therefore faced with a need to balance the protections these procedural requirements establish against the possibility of their exploitation by unscrupulous debtors.’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 5th February 2016

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

The Race to Court under EU Brussels II: A New Approach? – Family Law Week

Posted January 8th, 2016 in conflict of laws, divorce, EC law, news, service, time limits by tracey

‘Stuart Clark, a solicitor at The International Family Law Group LLP, reports on a recent Irish case which could have important implications for the priority of divorce proceedings in international cases.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 8th January 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Relief from sanctions- Be sensible or be prepared to pay – Zenith PI Blog

Posted June 9th, 2015 in delay, news, sanctions, service, striking out by tracey

‘Viridor Waste Management Ltd v Veolia ES Ltd [2015] (unreported)
The Claimant was awarded costs on the indemnity basis when the Defendant had taken unreasonable advantage of the Claimant’s late service of its particulars of claim in the hope of obtaining a windfall strike-out when it was obvious that relief from sanctions was appropriate.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 8th June 0215

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Heron Bros Ltd v Central Bedfordshire Council – WLR Daily

Heron Bros Ltd v Central Bedfordshire Council [2015] EWHC 604 (TCC); [2015] WLR (D) 137

‘The term “service in accordance with rules of court” in regulation 47F(5) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006, as amended, meant that valid service was achieved when the relevant step for service of a claim form, set out in CPR r 7.5(1), was completed within the seven-day time limit prescribed by regulation 47F(1).’

WLR Daily, 20th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Premature service of Claim Form – avoiding disaster – Zenith PI Blog

Posted January 27th, 2015 in appeals, case management, civil procedure rules, documents, news, service by sally

‘A problem frequently arises when, for one reason or another – most frequently the late arrival of the client in a solicitor’s office – the limitation period is nearly up, but one has not got the medical report or one has not got the materials needed for the drafting of the Particulars of Claim or indeed has grave doubts about whether the claim is viable, but plainly proceedings need to be commenced notwithstanding. In those circumstances, it is recognised as the best practice, following CPR 6.4(1)(b), to issue a claim form but to notify the court that the Claimant wishes to serve the Claim Form. If one does not do that, the court will serve the Claim Form automatically, whereas if you undertake to serve it yourself, you will have up to four months within which to serve the Claim Form. During that time, one can ensure that what needs to be done in order to present a coherent and correctly presented claim can be done.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 26th January 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Applications to allow service of Claim Form by alternative method/place – Explain your “Good Reason” – Zenith PI Blog

Posted January 27th, 2015 in appeals, civil procedure rules, claims management, documents, news, service by sally

‘The principles to apply when considering whether to allow an application under 6.15 (service of the CF by alternative method or at an alternative place). The evidence in support must explain the failure to serve.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 26th January 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Ashley and others v Tesco Stores Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted January 20th, 2015 in civil procedure rules, documents, law reports, Scotland, service, time limits by sally

Ashley and others v Tesco Stores Ltd and others [2015] WLR (D) 11

‘The applicable time limit for service outside the jurisdiction of a claim form on a Scottish registered company, at its registered office in Scotland, where the claimant sought to serve the claim form under section 1139(1) of the Companies Act 2006 was six months from the date of issue of the claim form, as laid down by CPR r 7.5(2).’

WLR Daily, 15th January 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Altomart Ltd v Salford Estates (No 2) Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted October 31st, 2014 in case management, civil procedure rules, law reports, service, time limits by sally

Altomart Ltd v Salford Estates (No 2) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1408; [2014] WLR (D) 451

‘An application under CPR r 3.1(2)(a) for an extension of time in which to file a respondent’s notice was by analogy subject to the robust approach to compliance with rules set down by the Court of Appeal in relation to applications for relief from sanction under CPR r 3.9.’

WLR Daily, 29th October 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Service by the courts – Law Society’s Gazette

‘A recent case provides clarification and guidance on the issue of service by the courts in contravention of the claimant’s instructions.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 27th October 2014

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Canning v Network Rail: service of supplementary witness evidence post-Mitchell – Zenith PI Blog

Posted October 3rd, 2014 in news, service, time limits, witnesses by tracey

‘The court in Canning v Network Rail [2014] EWHC 2104 (QB) treated an application to rely on supplementary witness evidence as an application for relief from sanctions. The Mitchell considerations therefore came into play.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 3rd October 2014

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Changes to Practice Direction 21 – Material to be Served and Filed in Relation to Child/Protected Party Settlement Claims – Zenith PI Blog

Posted September 23rd, 2014 in children, civil procedure rules, news, practice directions, service by sally

‘With the 75th Update to the Civil Procedure Rules (coming into force 1 October 2014), amendments to Practice Direction 21 (Children and Protected Parties) address the inconsistencies between the rules and practice direction in respect of the material that must be served and filed in relation to child/protected party settlement claims.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 23rd September 2014

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Isaac Stoute v LTA Operations Ltd (trading as Lawn Tennis Association) – WLR Daily

Posted May 22nd, 2014 in civil procedure rules, documents, law reports, service by sally

Isaac Stoute v LTA Operations Ltd (trading as Lawn Tennis Association) [2014] EWCA Civ 657; [2014] WLR (D) 212

‘Postal service of a claim form by the court in disregard of the claimant’s request to return the claim form to him so that he could serve it personally, in breach of CPR r 6.4(1)(b), was an “error of procedure”, within rule 3.10, and so did not invalidate service.’

WLR Daily, 15th May 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Nursing and Midwifery Council v Kidd and another – WLR Daily

Posted April 9th, 2014 in disciplinary procedures, law reports, midwives, nurses, service, time limits by sally

Nursing and Midwifery Council v Kidd and another [2014] EWHC 847 (Admin); [2014] WLR (D) 155

‘Where the Nursing and Midwifery Council applied to the High Court under article 31(8) and (9) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001 for the extension of an interim suspension order, the respondent affected by the order should ordinarily receive a minimum of seven calendar days notice of the application.’

WLR Daily, 26th March 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

High Court brands claim of late budget filing “manifest nonsense” – Litigation Futures

Posted March 13th, 2014 in budgets, case management, costs, news, service, time limits by tracey

‘A High Court judge yesterday sought to “reinforce the message that the Commercial Court will firmly discourage the taking of futile and time-wasting procedural points” as it appeared the message from last month’s Summit Navigation ruling “may not yet have been heard”.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 13th March 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Court’s permission needed to extend time for service of witness statements – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted January 22nd, 2014 in agreements, civil procedure rules, courts, news, service, time limits, witnesses by sally

‘In almost every litigated case the parties usually find themselves needing to vary the dates of some directions. This can be done by way of written agreement between the parties and is allowed by CPR 2.11.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 22nd January 2014

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk