SERVICE POINTS 59: AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO SERVE THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM DID NOT EXTEND TIME FOR THE CLAIM FORM: NEITHER DID THE ACTUAL STRIKING OUT OF THE ACTION…
Here we have an appeal which several procedural issues. Firstly the claimant could not really justify seeking an extension of time of 18 months for service of the Particulars of Claim. Secondly (and significantly) despite taking several procedural steps the…
FORM N1 HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY AMENDED: THIS COULD BE A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY: PUTTING THE DEFENDANT’S EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES FOR SERVICE…
Form N1 had a slight amendment made on the 23rd October. It is a very minor amendment, but one that practitioners need to be aware of. The one major problem that it could give rise to is if practitioners (or…
PROVING THINGS 303: PROVING POSTAL SERVICE: “A MERE ASSERTION OF NON-RECEIPT DOES NOT SUFFICE TO REBUT THE PRESUMPTION”
Even in this day and age disputes arise as to whether something has been posted or received. We have a consideration of the issues in this First-tier tribunal judgment. The respondent established service of some documents, but not others. Further…
SERVICE POINTS 58: ACCIDENT IN ENGLAND, CLAIMANTS LIVING IN AUSTRALIA: DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO CHALLENGE JURISDICTION REFUSED
This post comes within the “Service Points” series because the defendant here made an application to set aside the claim form and its service coupled with seeking a declaration that the court had no jurisdiction to try the claim. It…
SERVICE POINTS 57: PRESENCE IN THE JURISDICTION, A LAST KNOWN ADDRESS AND THE COST OF GETTING IT WRONG: UNSUCCESFUL CLAIMANT FACES A COSTS BILL OF £500,000…
Once again we are looking at a case where a claimant fails to effect service properly. The claimant failed for two reasons. Firstly the defendant was not “present” in the jurisdiction when the claim form was served. Secondly it appeared…
SERVICE POINTS 56 : PERSONAL SERVICE NOT EFFECTED: COURT RETROSPECTIVELY APPROVES ALTERNATIVE SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS IN CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS
There are very particular issues relating to service of committal proceedings. Normally an application has to be served personally. Sometimes, however, this is not easy. In this case the judge retrospectively authorised service of a committal application by an alternative…
SERVICE POINTS 55: THE SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT A SOLICITOR WAS TELLING LIES ABOUT SERVICE: SOLICITOR STRUCK OFF (DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO YOU…)
We have looked many times at issues relating to non or mis-service of the claim form. Here we have a case where a solicitor’s evidence as to service was disbelieved by a Circuit Judge. The case shows many familiar mistakes…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE NEED TO SERVE A SEALED CLAIM FORM: LITIGATORS HAVE BEEN COMING TO GRIEF ON THIS ISSUE FOR WELL OVER A DECADE (AT LEAST…)
Last week we looked at (another) case where a claimant had come to grief when it failed to serve a sealed claim form in time. This is an opportune time to remind readers of the basic point that to be…
SERVICE POINTS 54: THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A SEALED CLAIM FORM IN TIME: THERE WAS NO OBLIGATION ON A DEFENDANT TO MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 7.7: THE ACTION BITES THE DUST
Here we have a case where the claimant simply failed to serve a sealed claim form in time. Despite being warned of this by the defendant the claimant insisted that service of an unsealed claim form was sufficient. The claimant…
SERVICE POINTS 53: HOW DOES THE COURT PROTECT THE POSITION OF A PARTY WHO WANTS TO APPEAL DECISION IN RELATION TO JURISDICTION BUT RISKS “ACCEPTING” JURISDICTION IN THE MEANTIME? A PUZZLE SOLVED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
This judgment highlights the risk that a party who wishes to dispute jurisdiction can accidentally accept it. What, if any, steps should the courts take to protect an appellant in these circumstances. The litigant may wish to appeal to a…
COST BITES 429: A REMINDER THAT A CLAIMANT IS STILL LIABLE TO PAY COSTS EVEN IF PROCEEDINGS ARE NEVER SERVED: SOMETHING ABOUT PRE-ACTION CONDUCT TOO…
This judgment illustrates two important things. Firstly that a claimant’s liability to pay costs starts upon issue and remains even if proceedings are never served. Secondly that pre-action conduct can have an impact on the decision that a judge makes…
SERVICE POINTS 52: $28 MILLION CLAIM LOST BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO SERVE A CLAIM FORM PROPERLY (THESE CAN BE EXPENSIVE MISTAKES…)
This is a case ostensibly about limitation. However the central point for most litigators is that, in reality, it is about a failure to serve a claim form properly. The first claim was issued within the limitation period (following a…
SERVICE POINTS 51: HIGH COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE AN ORDER ALLOWING SERVICE BY EMAIL ON THE DEFENDANT’S SOLICITORS
In this case the defendant, a judgment debtor, attempted to set aside an order that a claim form could be served by email on their solicitors. The situation was an unusual one in that the claimant had a judgment against…
SERVICE POINTS 50: IS SERVICE OF A TENANT AND AN ADDRESS STATED IN THE LEASE GOOD SERVICE WHEN THE TENANT IS NOT THERE? DOES THE CONTRACT OVERRIDE THE CPR?
This Court of Appeal decision considers issues in relation to contractual service. Does a contractual term in a lease saying that service of documents can take place at the property in question override the CPR provisions as to service? In…
A BOOK ABOUT SERVICE (AT LONG LAST): WHAT IS MORE IT IS IMPRESSIVE, COMPREHENSIVE AND FILLS A GAP IN THE MARKET (AND, THIS BLOG’S PART IN ITS CREATION)
Regular readers will know that this blog features a lot of cases about service of the claim form. It is one of the most common problem areas in litigation. It is surprising that there has not been a recent text…
SERVICE POINTS 49: THE JUDGE WOULD HAVE SET ASIDE AN ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: IT COULD HAVE BEEN SERVED WITHOUT THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
This is another case that emphasises the importance of serving the claim form promptly. The claimants had obtained an order extending time for service. The defendants applied to set aside that order. The judge stated that, if the issue had…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DEFENDANT IS NOT THE CLAIMANT’S KEEPER: ANOTHER CASE WHERE (MIS) SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM LED TO GRIEF
We are going back to July 2018 where the High Court overturned a first instance decision in favour of a claimant on a service of the claim form issue. The judgment is particularly important because the first-instance judgment appeared to…
WHERE THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 4: NOT-SERVING PROPERLY; OBTAINING DEFAULT JUDGEMENT INCORRECTLY AND SUING A PARTY WRONGLY: A LOT OF LESSONS HERE
This post assumes that you have read post on this case earlier today. A claimant’s solicitor made a whole series of errors which led to the case being struck out against two defendants. We continue our series on what went…
SERVICE POINTS 48 : A DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN THE FIRST ACTION (AGAINST A DEFENDANT WHO WAS NEVER SERVED) LEADS TO A SECOND ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT
This is a sorry tale. Someone who may have had a perfectly good claim for damages for personal injury has their case struck out because of procedural mishaps by their own solicitors. It all stems from a failure to serve…
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED
This post arises out of the previous post in the series. However here I want to concentrate on one issue arising out of this. The claimant’s solicitors appear to have advised the claimant that they would not be liable to…
SERVICE POINTS 47: THE CASE ABOUT THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND THE UNSEALED CLAIM FORM: A RARE EXAMPLE OF “DENTON” PRINCIPLES APPLYING IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES
Here we have an unusual case about service of the claim form, with an unusual result. The judge reiterated the principle that a claimant must serve a sealed copy of the claim form, even though this was extremely difficult under…
SERVICE POINTS 46: A CLAIMANT WHO HAS NOT SERVED THE CLAIM FORM IN TIME CANNOT RELY ON CPR 6.15 OR 6.16: ANOTHER ACTION COMES TO GRIEF…
This case emphasises a number of important points about service: (1) There is always a duty on a claimant to serve the claim form in time, no matter what type of proceedings; (2) when a claim form has not been…
SERVICE POINTS 45: A SOLICITOR FAILS TO CHECK THE CE FILE AND 5,000 CLAIMS GO UP IN SMOKE: SEVERAL IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE, INCLUDING THE NEED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF PROMPTLY…
This case, where judgment was given today, is essential reading for anyone litigating using CE-File. It is also essential to anyone involved in group litigation. This is a case where 5,000 claimants were refused relief from sanctions. That initial difficulty…
SERVICE POINTS 44: LOCAL AUTHORITY FAILS TO SERVE PROPERLY ON INTERESTED PARTIES TO PROPOSED APPEAL: THE WHOLE APPEAL FAILS
Here we have another case of a failure to serve a claim form properly. This time a local authority failed to serve interested parties to an appeal because, rather than sending the claim forms to them personally, they were sent…
SERVICE POINTS 43: WHY CPR 6.15 IS NOT THE “CAVALRY” COMING OVER THE HILL TO SAVE YOU IF THE CLAIM FORM HAS NOT BEEN SERVED PROPERLY
There must be many anxious litigators who have read the words of CPR 6.15 and happily assumed that their case is saved. On the face of it this rule gives the court a wide power to authorise service by another…
SERVICE POINTS 42: A £82 MILLION POUND FAILS BECAUSE THE CLAIM FORM WAS SENT BY EMAIL TO SOLICITORS WHO HAD NOT STATED THAT THEY WOULD ACCEPT SERVICE: AN OLD ISSUE (AND A BIG ONE)
This will not be the only case about (mis) service of the claim form this week, however it may be the largest. We have the “traditional” pattern of a claimant leaving service until the very last day and then serving…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE RIGHT OF A DEFENDANT TO ASK FOR A CLAIM FORM TO BE SERVED: CPR 7.7 CONSIDERED
We have had two cases this year that deal with the provisions of CPR 7.7. A rule that allows a defendant to serve a notice requiring service of a claim form. It is worth knowing that this rule exists and…
SERVICE POINTS 41: THE DEFENDANTS REQUIRED AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION FOLLOWING INVALID SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A POINT FOR PRACTITIONERS TO WATCH…
Here we have a case where the defendants created unnecessary difficulties for themselves when taking a point as to invalid service of the claim form. The claim form was not properly served. The defendants acknowledged service indicating that they were…
SERVICE POINTS 40: SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS NOT VALID NEITHER WAS SERVICE AT THE “LAST KNOWN ADDRESS”: THE CLAIMANT HAD TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE AS TO HIS STATE OF KNOWLEDGE
We are looking at a case that bristles with procedural points, including several issues relating to valid service. Here we look at just one of those issues – whether proceedings had been validly served when sent by email or to…
SERVICE POINTS 39: ISSUES OVER CORRECT SPANISH ADDRESS DID NOT RENDER SERVICE INVALID
Here we have a case as to service when the claimant was successful. There were issues as to service as to the correct address and the correct means of service in Spain. The claimant adduced evidence from a Spanish lawyer…
SERVICE POINTS 38: THE CLAIMANT SERVES AT THE WRONG ADDRESS BUT THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO APPLY IN TIME (A CLASSIC STORY)
This is a case where lessons can be learnt by both claimants and defendants. The claimant served at the wrong address, however the defendant did not respond promptly or timeously. KEY PRACTICE POINT There are lessons here for both parties….
SERVICE POINTS 37 : IS SERVICE ON A P.0. BOX GOOD SERVICE? (OH – AND BY THE WAY – AS IT TURNS OUT – THE CLAIM FORM WAS NEVER, IN FACT, SERVED AT ALL): A BIT OF A SURPRISE FOR THE CLAIMANT AT THE APPEAL STAGE
Is service on a P.O. Box address good service? That was the issue being considered in this appeal. However the claimant was in for a bit of a shock. Enquiries by the judge revealed that the claim form had never…
SERVICE POINTS 36 : “THIS IS AN AREA OF UNDOUBTED STRICTNESS”: ERRORS IN SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM WERE FATAL TO THE CLAIM
Regular readers of this site will not need reminding of the strictness of the rules relating to service of the claim form. Here we have another example. The claimant failed to serve the sealed claim form within the period allowed…
SERVICE POINTS 35: HOT OFF THE PRESS: THE HIGH COURT UPHOLDS INITIAL FINDING THAT AN ELECTRONICALLY ISSUED AND SUBSQUENTLY AMENDED CLAIM FORM DOES NOT HAVE TO BE RE-SEALED PRIOR TO SERVICE
The cases on service of the claim form continue to flow. Here the defendant appealed a decision that it was not necessary for a claimant to serve a sealed copy of an amended claim form. As we shall see the…
SERVICE POINTS 33: COURT MADE AN ORDER FOR ALTERNATIVE SERVICE ON A RUSSIAN COMPANY’S LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES
Here was have a successful application for alternative service on the defendant’s legal representatives. It shows that in some circumstances the courts are willing to make such orders, particularly when the defendant is based abroad and there are potential issues…
SERVICE POINTS 32: MISSING OUT THE NAME OF THE ROAD ON THE CLAIM FORM DID NOT INVALIDATE SERVICE
The judge here considered an argument that a failure to include the name of the defendant’s street on the claim form meant that service was defective. This argument was rejected. The fact that the street was mentioned on the land…
SERVICE POINTS 31: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO APPLY IN TIME TO LIFT A STAY: A RARE SUCCESS ON A CLAIM FORM ISSUE
Here we are looking at an unusual set of facts in relation to service of the claim form, not least because it led to the issues being considered under the Denton criteria and is a (relatively rare) example of a…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANCE OF SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WITHIN THE TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE “BEAR TRAP” IN WAITING
The back to basics point today is based on a recent case which shows the importance of serving the particulars of claim within the four month period allowed for service of the claim form. The claimant served the particulars three…
SERVICE POINTS 30 : A PROCEDURAL DEBACLE: THE DEFENDANT HAD LEFT IT FAR TOO LATE TO TAKE A POINT AS TO SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM
Many cases relating to service of the claim form involve a procedural debacle. It is rare that they present a “dogs breakfast” such as this. The defendant took a point that the claim had been issued out of time, that…
SERVICE POINTS 29: WOULD THE COURT STRIKE OUT THE ACTION WHEN THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO COMPLY WITH A r. 7.7 NOTICE?
It is unusual to see cases about the operation of CPR 7.7. This rule allows a defendant to serve a notice requiring that a claim form be served. In this case the claimant did not comply and the defendant applied…
SERVICE POINTS 28 : EFFECTIVE SERVICE ON A RESIDENCE IN ENGLAND COULD NOT TAKE PLACE WHEN THE DEFENDANT WAS IN FACT ABROAD – AND LEGALLY PREVENTED FROM RETURNING
We are looking at a Court of Appeal judgment today which overturned a finding that a defendant had been properly served at an address in England. The defendant was not living in England when proceedings were served and, indeed, there…
SERVICE POINTS 27 : EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE CLAIM FORM SET ASIDE: FAILURES IN THE DUTY TO GIVE FULL DISCLOSURE PLAY A MAJOR PART
We have got to the middle of February and this is (I think) the first case about failures of service of the claim form this year. This case has a history we have seen a lot on this site. The…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DATE OF RECEIPT AT COURT FOR LIMITATION PURPOSES AND DATE OF ISSUE FOR THE PURPOSES OF SERVICE: AVOID TESTING THIS DISTINCTION IF YOU CAN
Here we look at an issue that can cause confusion, it is important from the point of view of determining the date from which the date of service runs. The relevant date for limitation purposes is the date of receipt…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN YOU MUST AND WHEN YOU CAN’T SERVE THE CLAIM FORM ON A SOLICITOR: TRY TO AVOID TELLING THE COURT YOU ARE “SURPRISED” BY THE RULES…
The issue of when a claim form can be served on a defendant’s solicitor is one that has been considered many times on this site over the years. There can be two fatal errors for claimants. (1) Serving on a…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ALWAYS WAS (AND REMAINS) A RISKY BUSINESS
This week we go back to January 2016. It is a post about the dangers of applying for extensions of time to serve the claim form. The points made a decade ago remain equally valid today. We saw several cases…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: WEBINAR 23rd JANUARY 2025: HOW TO AVOID “DICING WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH”
Readers of this blog know that issues relating to service of the claim form are a regular feature of the blog. There were numerous posts last year. There are likely to be issues throughout 2026. This webinar is designed to…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: SERVICE ON AN INDIVIDUAL USING S.1140 OF THE COMPANIES ACT 2006
This post reminds claimants that service can take place under s.1140 of the Companies Act on an individual in their capacity as an individual. It also serves as a reminder to defendants, and anyone who is a company director that…
REVIEW OF THE YEAR (4): CLAIM FORM ISSUES – SERVING ON A SOLICITOR WHEN YOU CAN’T AND WHEN YOU MUST: THIS OFTEN CAUSES PROBLEMS…
I am aware of the danger that issues relating to service of the claim form could come to dominate the end of year review. However this arises because of the number of cases considered over the year. What is worrying…
REVIEW OF THE YEAR (3): CLAIM FORM ISSUES: SERVICE AT THE “LAST KNOWN ADDRESS” AND THE CLAIMANT’S DUTIES
It may say something that the “Service Points” series started on August 14 this year and there are already 24 posts under that heading. Claim form problems continue to be a prominent issues in the courts. The series started because…
SERVICE POINTS 24: THE DEFENDANTS’ FAILURE TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION TIMEOUSLY MEANT THAT IT HAD WAIVED ISSUES RELATING TO SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM
One of the the issues that has arisen several times this year relates to whether there is an obligation on a defendant, who wishes to dispute the issue of service, to make an application under CPR Part 11. This is…
You must be logged in to post a comment.