ST v BAI (SA) trading as Brittany Ferries

ST v BAI (SA) trading as Brittany Ferries

The registrar’s decision to extend time for service of the claim form was within the range of reasonable decisions open to him; there were genuine difficulties with service, and the evaluation of the reason as 'middling-good' was justified on the facts. The appellate judge was wrong to substitute his own assessment for that of the registrar in the absence of a clear error.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: ST; Defendant/respondent: BAI (SA) trading as Brittany Ferries
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal From High Court Decision on Extension of Time to Serve Claim Form
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside; extension of time for service of claim form restored.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time for Service of Claim Form, Limitation Periods, Discretion Under CPR 7.6(2), Service Out of Jurisdiction
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Admiralty Law Extension of Time for Service of Claim Form Limitation Periods Discretion Under CPR 7.6(2) Service Out of Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ST

Claimant/appellant

BAI (SA) trading as Brittany Ferries

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Second Appeal From High Court Decision on Extension of Time to Serve Claim Form

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in overturning the registrar's decision to extend time for service of the claim form under CPR 7.6(2)
  2. 2 Whether there was a good reason for failing to serve the claim form within the prescribed period
  3. 3 Whether the appellate court was entitled to substitute its own assessment for that of the registrar

Ratio Decidendi

The registrar’s decision to extend time for service of the claim form was within the range of reasonable decisions open to him; there were genuine difficulties with service, and the evaluation of the reason as 'middling-good' was justified on the facts. The appellate judge was wrong to substitute his own assessment for that of the registrar in the absence of a clear error.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside; extension of time for service of claim form restored.

Orders

  • Order of 5 August 2020 extending time for service of claim form reinstated.
  • Claim to proceed.