- Service by email in the family court (Wilmot v Maughan)
- Original news
- What is the significance of this case? Why is it important for practitioners?
- How helpful is this judgment in clarifying the law in this area? Are there any remaining grey areas?
- Jurisdiction to set aside orders
- Set aside principles
- What are the practical implications of the judgment? What should practitioners be mindful of when advising in this area?
- How does this case fit in with other developments in this area of the law? Do you have any predictions for future developments in this area?
Family Analysis: Looking at the question of whether orders served by email are genuinely served, Joseph Switalski, barrister at 29 Bedford Row Chambers, who represented the respondent in Wilmot v Maughan, notes that the availability of portable devices and the ease of access to emails makes the concept of a fixed service ‘destination’ antiquated.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial