Department of Civil Aviation of the Kyrgyz Republic v Finrep GmbH [2006] EWHC 1722 (Comm) (22 May 2006)

Department of Civil Aviation of the Kyrgyz Republic v Finrep GmbH [2006] EWHC 1722 (Comm) (22 May 2006)

Order permitting substituted service on English barrister was irregular and inappropriate; permission to serve out of jurisdiction was required; service should be permitted on defendant's solicitors in London, and time for service extended.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 1722 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: The Dept. of Civil Aviation under the Ministry of Transport & Communications of the Kyrgyz Republic; Defendant: Finrep GmbH
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Claim (section 67 Arbitration Act 1996) / Application to Set Aside Order for Substituted Service; Extension of Time; Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Order for substituted service on barrister set aside; extension of time for service granted; permission to serve out of jurisdiction granted; service deemed effected on defendant's solicitors in London.
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Jurisdictional Challenge, Substituted Service, Extension of Time, Arbitration Act 1996 S.67, CPR 6.8, CPR 62 Practice Direction
Arbitration Civil Procedure Service of Process Jurisdictional Challenge Substituted Service Extension of Time Arbitration Act 1996 S.67 CPR 6.8 +1 more

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Dept. of Civil Aviation under the Ministry of Transport & Communications of the Kyrgyz Republic

Claimant

Finrep GmbH

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Claim (section 67 Arbitration Act 1996) / Application to Set Aside Order for Substituted Service; Extension of Time; Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether substituted service on English barrister was valid
  2. 2 Whether permission to serve out of jurisdiction was required
  3. 3 Whether Finrep was obliged to nominate solicitors to accept service

Ratio Decidendi

Order permitting substituted service on English barrister was irregular and inappropriate; permission to serve out of jurisdiction was required; service should be permitted on defendant's solicitors in London, and time for service extended.

Court Disposition

Order for substituted service on barrister set aside; extension of time for service granted; permission to serve out of jurisdiction granted; service deemed effected on defendant's solicitors in London.

Orders

  • Order permitting substituted service on Mr Haddon-Cave set aside.
  • Extension of time for service of arbitration claim form granted.