Noble Caledonia Ltd v Air Niugini Ltd

Noble Caledonia Ltd v Air Niugini Ltd

FDL's activities did not constitute Air Niugini's activities for the purposes of CPR 6.9, as FDL acted as an agent with limited authority, was paid by commission, and carried on its own business. The criteria for presence set out in Adams v Cape Industries were not satisfied.

Parties
Claimant: Noble Caledonia Limited; Defendant: Air Niugini Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Preliminary Issue—service of Proceedings
Outcome
Claim struck out for improper service—proceedings not properly served.
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Agency, Jurisdiction Over Foreign Companies
Civil Procedure Service of Process Agency Jurisdiction Over Foreign Companies

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Noble Caledonia Limited

Claimant

Air Niugini Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Preliminary Issue—service of Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service on Air Niugini Limited was validly effected under CPR 6.9
  2. 2 Whether Flight Directors Scheduled Services Limited's office constituted a place at which Air Niugini carried on its activities

Ratio Decidendi

FDL's activities did not constitute Air Niugini's activities for the purposes of CPR 6.9, as FDL acted as an agent with limited authority, was paid by commission, and carried on its own business. The criteria for presence set out in Adams v Cape Industries were not satisfied.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out for improper service—proceedings not properly served.

Orders

  • Proceedings not properly served; if Air Niugini is to be served, it must be served out of the jurisdiction.