header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Personal service: time for review?

06 November 2020
Issue: 7909 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
Twenty Essex barristers explore recent developments in the law on service―the means by which legal proceedings are commenced―and conclude that it’s time for a ‘wholescale review’, in this week’s NLJ

Paul Lowenstein QC and Andrew Dinsmore focus on the law on personal service within the jurisdiction. The courts have looked at many different scenarios, including digital service, service by alternative means in multi-defendant litigation and a case where the claimant’s agent tried to physically serve the claim form but was prevented by the defendant’s security team (the papers were left by the defendant’s car before the defendant was driven off in it).

Lowenstein and Dismore suggest that the law on service is one of the areas that would benefit from a Law Commission review, and ‘especially so given that the transition period for the UK’s exit from the EU is fast-approaching, at which time the UK will have to consider its treaty obligations in relation to service’.

They suggest some starting points for the Law Commission to study.

@TwentyEssex


MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll