header-logo header-logo

18 October 2013 / Bernard Pressman
Issue: 7580 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Are you being served?

istock_000000480331medium

Bernard Pressman considers the Supreme Court’s take on retrospective orders in relation to service

In Abela & Others v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44; [2013] All ER (D) 249 (Jun), the Supreme Court considered the circumstances in which a court may make an order retrospectively, declaring that steps taken by a claimant to bring a claim form to the attention of a defendant should be treated as good service.

The facts

In April 2009, Mr Abela brought a claim for damages for fraud against Mr Baadarani in connection with a contract to purchase shares in an Italian company (Gama SpA) that were either worthless, or were worth significantly less than the purchase price. The contract expressly provided that it was governed by English law and contained a non-exclusive English jurisdiction clause.

In September 2009, Abela was granted permission to serve the claim form and other documents upon Baadarani at an address in Beirut, Lebanon. The time for service of the claim form was extended to 31 December 2009 and Abela was given permission

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll