header-logo header-logo

17 May 2007 / Ian Mann
Issue: 7273 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

21st century service

Courts are prepared to use more imaginative ways to access and share information, says Ian Mann

In Rockall v DEFRA [2007] EWHC 614 (Admin), [2007] All ER (D) 358 (Mar) the Divisional Court was asked to decide two fundamentally important issues about when proceedings for regulatory offences are as a matter of law “instituted” in the  magistrates’ court.

The resolution of these issues affects the way in which magistrates’ courts accept the initiating process for all prosecutions and when time stops in relation to limitation. Interestingly, the case has potentially signalled the green light for the future imaginative use of systems of electronic service and even joint electronic access to remote servers to be effected without the need for further procedural rules.

FAX SERVICE

The first issue was whether or not service of an information commencing regulatory proceedings by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) pursuant to the Forestry Act 1967 (FoA 1967) could be lawfully served by fax. The appellant contended that in the absence of detailed provision for service

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll