Weston v Bates & Anor [2012] EWHC 590 (QB) (15 March 2012)

Weston v Bates & Anor [2012] EWHC 590 (QB) (15 March 2012)

Service of the claim form out of the jurisdiction under CPR 6.40(3)(c) is valid if effected by a method permitted by the law of the country of service, and there is no requirement under the CPR that the claim form served must be a 'first generation' sealed copy; a 'second generation' copy suffices if it brings the proceedings to the defendant's attention.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 590
Parties
Claimant: Robert Lawrence Weston; First Defendant: Kenneth William Bates; Second Defendant: Leeds United Football Club Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Appeal From Master's Decision on Validity of Service Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Jurisdiction, Limitation Period, Alternative Service, Interpretation of Civil Procedure Rules
Civil Procedure Defamation Service of Process Jurisdiction Limitation Period Alternative Service Interpretation of Civil Procedure Rules

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Lawrence Weston

Claimant

Kenneth William Bates

First Defendant

Leeds United Football Club Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Appeal From Master's Decision on Validity of Service Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of a claim form out of the jurisdiction under CPR 6.40(3)(c) requires a 'first generation' sealed copy or if a 'second generation' copy suffices
  2. 2 Whether compliance with the law of the country of service (Monaco) is sufficient for valid service under English law
  3. 3 Whether the steps taken by the claimant amounted to valid service or could be retrospectively validated

Ratio Decidendi

Service of the claim form out of the jurisdiction under CPR 6.40(3)(c) is valid if effected by a method permitted by the law of the country of service, and there is no requirement under the CPR that the claim form served must be a 'first generation' sealed copy; a 'second generation' copy suffices if it brings the proceedings to the defendant's attention.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The court has jurisdiction over the claim against Mr Bates.
  • Service effected by the claimant is valid under CPR 6.40(3)(c).