Weston v Bates & Anor

Weston v Bates & Anor

Service of the claim form out of 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 English law that the claim form served be a sealed 'first generation' copy; the appeal is dismissed as the steps taken were sufficient to bring the claim to the defendant's attention.

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
Civil / Appeal From Master Mc Cloud's Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Jurisdiction, Limitation Period, Alternative Service
Civil Procedure Service of Process Jurisdiction Limitation Period Alternative Service

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

Parties

Robert Lawrence Weston

Claimant

Kenneth William Bates

First Defendant

Leeds United Football Club Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Master Mc Cloud's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of claim form out of jurisdiction was valid under CPR 6.40(3)(c)
  2. 2 Whether a sealed 'first generation' copy is required for valid service
  3. 3 Whether steps taken amounted to good alternative service or justified extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

Service of the claim form out of 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 English law that the claim form served be a sealed 'first generation' copy; the appeal is dismissed as the steps taken were sufficient to bring the claim to the defendant's attention.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Court has jurisdiction to try the claim against Mr Bates
  • No retrospective validation or extension of time granted