header-logo header-logo

29 November 2013
Issue: 7586 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Divorce service abroad

If service of a divorce petition on the respondent abroad is bad...

If service of a divorce petition on the respondent abroad is bad because the exacting requirements of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR) have not been complied with but the respondent takes no point and acknowledges service, should the court take any point?

The requirements for service of a petition out of the jurisdiction are generally laid down by the relevant Regulation or Convention (which are therefore reflected in the FPR) or, where none applies, the law of the country in which the petition is to be served: FPR r 6.43(3). In the case of service under Council Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007, the effect of Art 19 of the Regulation is that where the respondent has appeared, it is not necessary to establish that service has been effected in accordance with the Regulation; a similar position applies to service under the 1965 Hague Convention on Service, by virtue of Art 15 of the Convention.

Accordingly, unless the acknowledgement itself raises an issue about

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