Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2014 » April » 22

WHAT IS THE DATE OF SERVICE? THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE “DEEMED” DATE OF SERVICE AND THE “EFFECTED” DATE OF SERVICE

April 22, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

T & L SUGARS LTD V TATE & LYLE INDUSTRIES LTD [2014] EWHC 1066 Problems with service and the date of service continue to abound. They have always been subject to a much stricter regime.  In particular the date of…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • DO YOU WANT TO BECOME A HOUSING LAW BLOGGER? NEARLY LEGAL REQUIRES A TEAM OF WRITERS
  • DEALING WITH FISH FILES, PROCRASTINATION AND DELAY: THE LITIGATOR’S FRIEND: A REMINDER OF USEFUL LINKS, POSTS AND GUIDANCE AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS
  • LIMITATION PERIODS AND CONSUMER CREDIT ACT CLAIMS: IT MUST “BE RECOGNISED THAT NOT ALL CLAIMS ARE SUBJECT TO LIMITATION PERIODS”: (HOWEVER THERE IS A STING IN THE EXHAUST PIPE FOR CLAIMANTS…)
  • SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT, DENTON AND DELAY: SHOULD THE COURT REFUSE THE DEFENDANT RELIEF BECAUSE THEY HAD CAUSED UNNECESSARY DELAY AND COSTS?
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: “BACKDATING LETTERS” TO DELIBERATELY MISLEAD COULD COST YOU: £4.58 MILLION IN THIS CASE: (METADATA COMES INTO PLAY NOW)

Top Posts

INSURER'S APPLICATION TO COMMIT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: LITIGATION IS NOT CONDUCTED ON THE BASIS THAT, NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE, A PARTY MAY BE ABLE TO PUT MATTERS RIGHT AT SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE...
SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT, DENTON AND DELAY: SHOULD THE COURT REFUSE THE DEFENDANT RELIEF BECAUSE THEY HAD CAUSED UNNECESSARY DELAY AND COSTS?
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: "BACKDATING LETTERS" TO DELIBERATELY MISLEAD COULD COST YOU: £4.58 MILLION IN THIS CASE: (METADATA COMES INTO PLAY NOW)
COST BITES 443: USEFUL CHECKLISTS: A CHECKLIST ON COSTS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR CASES (FOR CLAIMANTS)
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW SERIES 4: A RECAP OF THE PREVIOUS SERIES AND THE DEADLY SINS OF ADVOCATES: DON'T BE CONFUSING OR BORING

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop