Thomas Bishop Ltd v Helmville Ltd: CA 1972

The court considered what was to be understood by a judgment which had been regularly obtained. Orr LJ (dissenting): ‘the point of time to be looked at in deciding whether the judgment was regularly obtained is the time when the judgment was given or signed, and if at that time there is nothing known to the court (or to the plaintiff whose duty it would be to communicate it to the court) which indicates that the relevant process has not been delivered in the ordinary course of post, it is to be deemed to have been so delivered for the purposes of that judgment, though it will be open to the defendant to apply to have that judgment set aside on the court’s discretion on the ground, inter alia, that he was not served in time.’


Orr LJ


[1972] 1 QB 464


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNelson and Another v Clearsprings (Management) Ltd CA 22-Sep-2006
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.245077