作者

Edward Spencer

高级法律顾问

Read More
作者

Edward Spencer

高级法律顾问

Read More

2020年5月26日

Disputes Quick Read – 60 / 87 观点

Disputes Quick Read: The importance of proper service

  • QUICK READ

Correctly serving a claim form is a crucial step in commencing litigation. It marks the point at which a defendant is on notice that they will need to defend a claim and begins the litigation clock. Failure to serve the document in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR 6.3) can cause significant issues for a claimant. Post, personal service and fax are the classic examples – but what about alternate methods, including novel electronic means?

The Civil Procedure Rules do allow the court to make an order permitting service by alternative methods (CPR 6.15) in situations where service under the existing rules is not possible. Alternative methods successfully used to date have included WhatsApp, a website's contact form and Facebook's Messenger platform. What constitutes good alternative service can also include "steps already taken to bring the claim form to the attention of the defendant". 

However, it is vital to note that – while these alternative methods are available – in order to be successful and considered "good service", they require the permission of the court by way of an order under CPR 6.15.

In Canada Goose UK Retail Ltd and another v Persons Unknown and another, the clothing retailer Canada Goose failed in its bid for a final injunction against a fluctuating group of protesters whose identities and addresses were unknown, on one basis because they had failed to obtain an order for alternative service. In that case, it was at the physical premises subject to the protests or on social media platforms used by the protesters. Such an order would likely have been available to the claimant but had not been sought.

The case serves as a useful reminder that in times where ordinary service is difficult if a claimant wished to use a novel method of service – including a new technology – it must follow the procedure in accordance with the CPR in relation to service by alternate means.

本系列内容

纠纷和调查

New SFO Director announces bold plans to tackle fraud

2024年3月21日

作者 作者

纠纷和调查

What are the litigation trends for 2024?

2024年2月1日

作者 Katie Chandler, Emma Allen

纠纷和调查

The use of AI in Trial Witness Statements post-PD 57AC

2023年10月23日

作者 作者

纠纷和调查

Failure to prevent fraud – a new offence?

2023年8月14日

作者 作者

纠纷和调查

CJC costs review – what will change?

2023年6月1日

作者 James Bryden, Helen Robinson

纠纷和调查

Embargoed judgments – dos and don'ts

2023年5月16日

作者 Stephanie High

加密资产、区块链和分布式账本技术

Disputes Quick Read: New obligations on cryptobusinesses to report under the UK sanctions regime

2022年8月9日

作者 Nick Maday

纠纷和调查

Disputes Quick Read: New gateway for serving Norwich Pharmacal Orders and Bankers Trust orders out of the jurisdiction

Welcome news for those pursuing fraud claims in the English Courts

2022年7月28日

作者 Emma Allen, Samantha Brendish

纠纷和调查

Disputes Quick Read: Care required when drafting SPA claim notices

2020年9月23日

作者 作者

纠纷和调查

Disputes quick read: pilot error?

2020年2月13日

作者 Andrew Howell

纠纷和调查

Disputes Quick Read: Dealing in crypto? Be careful what you call it

2022年4月7日

作者 作者

Call To Action Arrow Image

Latest insights in your inbox

Subscribe to newsletters on topics relevant to you.

Subscribe
Subscribe

Related Insights

纠纷和调查

Disputes Quick Read: Disclosure - What information can be redacted?

2022年7月25日
Briefing

作者 Edward Spencer

点击此处了解更多
纠纷和调查

Disputes Quick Read: Disclosure Pilot Scheme – here to stay

2022年7月21日
Quick read

作者 Edward Spencer

点击此处了解更多
纠纷和调查

Disputes Quick Read: an important reminder of the duty to disclose electronic documents in native format

2022年6月13日
Briefing

作者 Edward Spencer

点击此处了解更多