Cross-border service—issues with service

Many of the common issues which arise when dealing with service in England and Wales also arise when considering those issues which may arise when seeking to serve documents in another jurisdiction, eg inability to serve the document in time, unable to serve the defendant in the manner stipulated in Part 6.

Service toolkit

The toolkit is a comprehensive, interactive resource designed to assist in identifying and navigating through to relevant content throughout the Lexis+® UK Dispute Resolution module. The toolkit enables you to view core content, ie Practice Notes, Checklists, Flowcharts. To help you navigate to the materials most relevant for the part of the service process you are interested in, the toolkit is divided into a series of tabs called 'phases' and 'sub-phases'. see: Serving the claim form—toolkit.

Difficulties with service

A claim form will only be valid for service if served within the relevant time frame provided for in either the rules within the CPR or by statutory time limits; the time limits for serving the claim form when serving outside England and Wales differ to when serving in the jurisdiction.

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Dispute Resolution News

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—23 January 2025

This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes analysis of a number of key DR developments and key judicial decisions including: the Civil Justice Committee’s response to the consultation on contempt of court and the Court of Appeal decision in Clifford Chance LLP v Societe Generale SA (jurisdiction agreement); dates for your diary; details of our most recently published content; and other information of general interest to dispute resolution practitioners.

Recoverability of chargee’s costs of sale and enforcement (Brierley v Otuo)

Dispute Resolution: The High Court has refused an appeal by a charge-holder in long-running litigation with the result that the costs of sale and enforcement were not recoverable. The claimant had secured a number of final charging orders and orders for sale over the Defendant’s interest in two properties. The parties later entered into a pre-sale consent order in 2020 whereby a part-payment was made in relation to sums owed on both properties, and agreement was reached to remove all charges on one property. The court later held in April 2022 that the part-payment had the effect of discharging the charging orders in place. In July 2023, the Master discharged the final charging orders over the second property, staying orders for possession and sale and held that the claimant could not recover the costs of sale and enforcement. On appeal, the court declined to imply a term into the lower court’s order that the discharge was subject to payment of outstanding costs of sale which had not been otherwise provided for in previous orders or by agreement. Written by Pépin Aslett, barrister and head of the Business and Property Team, St John’s Buildings, Lucas Gregory, pupil barrister, St John’s Buildings.

Revisiting a failure to provide accurate and timely costs information (Underhill v Thackray Williams Solicitors)

Dispute Resolution analysis: This decision highlights the risks to solicitors of not providing accurate costs information at the outset of a retainer along with regular updates to enable a client to make informed decisions about the costs to be incurred. In this case, the judge disallowed undisclosed partner supervisory time as the client had no notice of these charges and deprived the firm of the usual indemnity approach carrying out a broad-brush assessment of reasonable costs. The judge also exercised his discretion to disallow the firm’s costs of the assessment despite the firm coming within 20 percent of the costs sought on assessment. In essence, the judge relied on the lack of clarity in the firm’s bill as demanded and the lack of warning before costs were incurred to find that the client was justified in challenging the bill on assessment. Written by Lauren Godfrey, barrister at Gatehouse Chambers.

Can a foreign judgment be enforced via the courts of England and Wales even when it is no longer enforceable in the foreign jurisdiction? (Olsen v Finansiel Stabilitet A/S)

Dispute Resolution analysis: In a recent decision Mr Justice Kerr considered whether a Danish judgment was enforceable in England and Wales, notwithstanding that the limitation period for enforcement had expired, rendering the judgment unenforceable in Denmark. The court held that although the judgment had been validly registered within time, it was unenforceable by reason of the expiry of either the Danish or the English limitation period for enforcement of judgments and it was therefore (ultimately) unenforceable by the courts of England and Wales. Written by Sarah Prager KC, barrister at Deka Chambers.

View Dispute Resolution by content type :

News