Shiblaq v Sadikoglu

Shiblaq v Sadikoglu

Service on the defendant in Turkey was not valid under Turkish law or the Hague Convention due to Turkey's objection to Article 10. Article 15 of the Hague Convention does not provide an alternative route to effective service for default judgment where the method used is impermissible. CPR 3.10 and CPR 6.9 cannot be used to retrospectively validate or dispense with service in a manner that circumvents the requirements of the Hague Convention. The default judgment must be set aside as of right under CPR 13.2.

Parties
Claimant: Basil Shiblaq; Defendant: Kahraman Sadikoglu
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Proceedings / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment; Applications Under CPR 3.10 and CPR 6.9
Outcome
Judgment in default set aside; claimant's applications refused
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Default Judgment, Hague Convention, Retrospective Validation of Service, International Comity
Civil Procedure Private International Law Service of Process Default Judgment Hague Convention Retrospective Validation of Service International Comity

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Basil Shiblaq

Claimant

Kahraman Sadikoglu

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Proceedings / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment; Applications Under CPR 3.10 and CPR 6.9

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service effected on the defendant in Turkey was valid for purposes of CPR 12.3(1) and entitled the claimant to default judgment
  2. 2 Whether the court should remedy procedural errors under CPR 3.10
  3. 3 Whether the court should dispense with service under CPR 6.9

Ratio Decidendi

Service on the defendant in Turkey was not valid under Turkish law or the Hague Convention due to Turkey's objection to Article 10. Article 15 of the Hague Convention does not provide an alternative route to effective service for default judgment where the method used is impermissible. CPR 3.10 and CPR 6.9 cannot be used to retrospectively validate or dispense with service in a manner that circumvents the requirements of the Hague Convention. The default judgment must be set aside as of right under CPR 13.2.

Court Disposition

Judgment in default set aside; claimant's applications refused

Orders

  • Judgment in default is set aside under CPR 13.2
  • Claimant's applications under CPR 3.10 and CPR 6.9 are refused