The court was asked the parties agree an extension of time for service of a claim form outside the period specified in r. 7.5. The particulars of claim were served nearly five months late. Held: An extension of time could be agreed between the parties in writing, but the claim was struck out because there … Continue reading Thomas v The Home Office: CA 19 Oct 2006
The claimant had issued proceedings in time, but then the limitation period expired before it was served, and in the meantime the limitation period had expired. The defendant appealed against an automatic extension of time for service granted to the claimant. Held: The Rules should generally be interpreted without reference to case law under the … Continue reading Hashtroodi v Hancock: CA 27 May 2004
The court was asked whether, when a claim was issued towards the very end of a limitation period, but was then not served, and the claim was struck out, CPR Part 7.5(1) gave a further four months in which it could be resurrected at the discretion of a judge under section 33 of the 1980 … Continue reading Aktas v Adepta: CA 22 Oct 2010
Date of service of claim form sent from England to defendant in Scotland. Judges: Sharp, Asplin LJJ, Sir Rupert Jackson Citations: [2019] EWCA Civ 648, [2019] WLR(D) 282 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 6.14 7.5 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Civil Procedure Rules Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.638808
The defendant did not appear at the trial and now appealed the judgment. The claim form and court papers had been served by post at the wrong address. The question was whether a defendant wanting to set aside a judgment was required to persuade the court to exercise its discretion or whether he was entitled … Continue reading Nelson and Another v Clearsprings (Management) Ltd: CA 22 Sep 2006
The claimant had sought an extension of time for service of her claim form in her action for personal injury. The solicitors in error did not include the words ‘claim form’ in their request. The judge had initially held the error was one of drafting not of procedure, and refused rectification. Held: The distinction was … Continue reading Steele v Mooney and others: CA 8 Feb 2005
In each case claims had been late in being served and extensions in time were sought and refused. Held: The recent authorities were examined. The words ‘has been unable to serve’ in CPR 7.6(3)(a) include all cases where the court has failed to serve, including mere oversight. The court’s discretion might then be exercised according … Continue reading Cranfield and Another v Bridgegrove Ltd; Claussen v Yeates etc: CA 14 May 2003
The claimant appealed against an order striking out his claim for personal injuries. The claim had been issued in time, but not served. An extension of time was granted, and the notice sent by first class post the day before that period expired. The defendant had claimed that the rules deemed service on the second … Continue reading Godwin v Swindon Borough Council: CA 10 Oct 2001
The appellant claimed personal injuries. His solicitors issued a claim form within the limitation period, but only served it after the expiry of the four month period after the date of issue within which CPR 7.5 stipulated that the claim had to be served. CPR 7.6 provided that a claimant could apply for an order … Continue reading Vinos v Marks and Spencer plc: CA 2001
The court was asked: ‘can the court proceed to validate a warrant of possession where a landlord who seeks to enforce his right to possession because of an alleged breach of the terms of a suspended possession order has not complied with CPR 83.2? ‘ Held: CPR r 83.2 were intended to provide real protection … Continue reading Cardiff County Council v Lee (Flowers): CA 19 Oct 2016
The claimant had issued proceedings and the defendant filed an acknowledgement, and then argued that the court had no jurisdiction. The claimant appealed against an order declining jurisdiction. Held: Where a party filed an acknowledgement, that was an acceptance of the court’s jurisdiction unless at the same time it was made clear that the acknowledgement … Continue reading Hoddinott and others v Persimmon Homes (Wessex) Ltd: CA 21 Nov 2007
The respondent had made a personal injury claim, but had then been discovered to have wildly and dishonestly exaggerated the damages claim. The defendant argued that the court should hand down some condign form of punishment, and appealed against refusal of a strike out of the claim. The Court of Appeal said that it was … Continue reading Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers: SC 27 Jun 2012
