header-logo header-logo

The bailiff is not for hire

17 February 2017
Issue: 7734 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Is the court entitled to refuse a request for bailiff service of proceedings where the prescribed fee has been paid or there is an entitlement to fee remission?

In general, it is a matter for the court’s discretion and bailiff service will usually be declined if not requested by a litigant in person. The FPR at PD6A, para 11.4 expressly provide in relation to service of applications for matrimonial and civil partnership orders that a request will rarely be granted where the party is legally represented and that it will be necessary for the representative to show why service by bailiff is required rather than by process server. A similar approach to that applying in family business can be expected in civil business with the CPR not granting any specific right to bailiff service except for Pt 71 orders to attend court for questioning (see PD71, para 3). The fee for bailiff service is £110 unless the requesting party obtains remission (help with fees). Bailiff service is unsuccessful? The fee is lost.

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll