Electronic Service; forum conveniens; targeting; and intellectual property (Entertainment One v Sconnect)

Table of contents

• What are the practical implications of this case?
• What was the background?
• What did the court decide?
• Case details

Article summary

IP analysis: The court held that a purposive approach was needed when interpreting Practice Direction 6A on electronic service of originating documents. Failure on the part of a serving party to ask the recipient about limitations on accepting service by electronic means is not necessarily fatal to good service. Likewise, service is not automatically defective where the defendants’ solicitors specify more than one email address at which to effect service. Moreover, if a bilateral service treaty is in force but alternative methods of service are permitted then the applicant only needs to show ‘good reason’, rather than ‘exceptional reasons’, for alternative service. The court also held that the defendants targeted the UK market, and that England and Wales was the appropriate forum. Written by Stefano Braschi, barrister at Serle Court.