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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll