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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll