Beating the tardy defendant; new workers’ rights; Forced Backdate (not Backstop); success fees deaded
LATE AoS OR DEFENCE?
An acknowledgment of service filed late but before judgment in default has been requested or applied for is a bar to that judgment being entered. That’s the position if Andrew Baker J got it right in Cunico Resources NV and others v Daskalakis and another and another case [2018] EWHC 3382 (Comm). He there held that, following a late acknowledgment, the claimants were not entitled to a default judgment pursuant to a subsequent application (on notice and not by way of request, because the claimants were contending for service out of the jurisdiction—see CPR 12.10). I suggest that the position would be the same in respect of a late defence followed by a request for judgment in default.
The judge followed Unilever plc v Pak Supermarket [2016] EWHC 3846 (IPEC) but declined to follow McDonald & McDonald v D&F Contracts Ltd [2018] EWHC 1600 (TCC) although he had some doubt as to whether the latter
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
