Freetown v Assethold Ltd: CA 14 Dec 2012

A party to an arbitration under the 1996 Act disputed whether the award had been served so as to leave that party out of time to appeal.
Rix LJ spoke of the common law as requiring proof of receipt, whereas the Interpretation Act deemed receipt from proof of posting. But he did not thereby mean that the common law required it to be shown that the document had actually come to the attention of the recipient, merely that it had been duly delivered at the recipient’s address.
Sir Andrew Morritt C, Rix, Patten LJJ
[2012] EWCA Civ 1657, [2013] 1 EGLR 57, [2013] CP Rep 16, [2013] 2 All ER 323, [2013] 1 EG 49, [2012] WLR(D) 379, [2013] RVR 150, [2013] 11 EG 82, [2013] 1 WLR 701
Bailii, WLRD
Party Wall etc Act 1996 15(1), Interpretation Act 1978 7
England and Wales
CitedC A Webber (Transport) Ltd v Railtrack plc CA 15-Jul-2003
A notice served under s25 of the 1954 Act, being sent by recorded delivery to the tenant at its place of abode, was irrebuttably deemed to have been served on the day it was posted. Section 23 of the 1927 Act operated to disapply section 7 of the . .
Appeal fromFreetown Ltd v Assethold Ltd QBD 21-May-2012
Appeal from party wall award. . .

Cited by:
CitedNewcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood SC 25-Apr-2018
Notice of dismissal begins when received by worker
The court was asked: ‘If an employee is dismissed on written notice posted to his home address, when does the notice period begin to run? Is it when the letter would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post? Or when it was in fact . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.467131