header-logo header-logo

Running out of time

03 September 2009 / Ruth Pratt
Issue: 7383 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Ruth Pratt considers extending time for service of a claim form

Claimants have four months from the date of issue to serve the claim form (six months if serving out of the jurisdiction).

Time for service can be extended on application: if made within the time limit, under CPR 7.6(2); if made outside the time limit, under CPR 7.6(3). CPR 7.6(3) provides a threshold checklist of conditions which must be satisfied before the court can order an extension. The court may make such an order only if—(i) the court has failed to serve the claim form; or (ii) the claimant has taken all reasonable steps to comply with R 7.5 but has been unable to do so; and (iii) in either case, the claimant has acted promptly in making the application.

There is no such checklist under CPR 7.6(2).
 

The cases
 

The exercise of the discretion is dependent on the individual facts of each case. The recent first instance decisions in Imperial Cancer, FG Hawkes v Beli Shipping and Sodastream v Coates

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll