Asia Pacific (HK) Ltd. & Ors v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd (Hanjin Pennsylvania)

Asia Pacific (HK) Ltd. & Ors v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd (Hanjin Pennsylvania)

The dispatch of the fax of 21st March 2005 by the claimants' solicitors to the defendants' solicitors constituted valid service of the claim form by a permitted method under the CPR, as there was no indication that it was sent for information only and the recipient had previously indicated willingness to accept service by fax. The absence of a response pack and the use of a 'Claimants Copy' were procedural irregularities but did not negate service.

Parties
Claimants: Asia Pacific (HK) Limited & Others; Defendant: Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd; Defendant: Owners of the MV 'Hanjin Pennsylvania'
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim (cargo Loss/damage) / Judgment on Preliminary Issue of Service of Claim Form
Outcome
Declaration granted that the claim form was served within time.
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Limitation of Actions, Extension of Time, Dispensing With Service
Civil Procedure Shipping Law Service of Process Limitation of Actions Extension of Time Dispensing With 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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Asia Pacific (HK) Limited & Others

Claimants

Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd

Defendant

Owners of the MV 'Hanjin Pennsylvania'

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim (cargo Loss/damage) / Judgment on Preliminary Issue of Service of Claim Form

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim form was validly served within the time prescribed by CPR 7.5
  2. 2 Whether time for service should be extended under CPR 7.6
  3. 3 Whether the court should dispense with service under CPR 6.9

Ratio Decidendi

The dispatch of the fax of 21st March 2005 by the claimants' solicitors to the defendants' solicitors constituted valid service of the claim form by a permitted method under the CPR, as there was no indication that it was sent for information only and the recipient had previously indicated willingness to accept service by fax. The absence of a response pack and the use of a 'Claimants Copy' were procedural irregularities but did not negate service.

Court Disposition

Declaration granted that the claim form was served within time.

Orders

  • Declaration that the claim form dated 10th February 2005 was served on Hanjin on 21st March 2005 within the time prescribed by CPR 7.5.