header-logo header-logo

05 January 2012
Issue: 7495 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Practice & procedure

Abela and others v Baardarani [2011] EWCA Civ 1571, [2011] All ER (D) 171 (Dec)

CPR 6.37(5)(b)(i) authorised the court to make an order for alternative service pursuant to CPR 6.15(1) and also to make such an order with retrospective effect pursuant to CPR 6.15(2). Nevertheless, the exercise of that power had to be exercised cautiously and was to be regarded as exceptional. Therefore, it would usually be inappropriate to validate retrospectively a form of service which was not authorised by an order of an English judge when it was effected and was not good service by local law.

The fact that CPR 6.40(4) expressly stated that nothing in any court order could authorise or require any person to do anything contrary to the law of the country in which the document was to be served did not mean that it could be appropriate to validate a form of service which, while not itself contrary to the local law in the sense of being illegal, was nevertheless not valid by that law.

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
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
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
back-to-top-scroll