Mashate v Kaguta [2009] EWCA Civ 964 (28 July 2009)

Mashate v Kaguta [2009] EWCA Civ 964 (28 July 2009)

Service at the Ugandan High Commission did not constitute valid service under CPR Part 6 as it was not the respondent's usual or last known residence; new evidence regarding an alleged agreement on address for service was not admissible as it was not before the lower court and failed Ladd v Marshall criteria; no important point of principle or compelling reason for second appeal.

Citation
[2009] EWCA Civ 964
Parties
Applicant: Mashate; Respondent: Kaguta
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission for Second Appeal
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Service of Process, State Immunity, Default Judgment, Appeal Procedure
Civil Procedure International Law Service of Process State Immunity Default Judgment Appeal Procedure

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

Parties

Mashate

Applicant

Kaguta

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission for Second Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of claim form at Ugandan High Commission constituted valid service under CPR Part 6
  2. 2 Whether new evidence regarding agreement on address for service should be admitted
  3. 3 Whether permission for second appeal should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

Service at the Ugandan High Commission did not constitute valid service under CPR Part 6 as it was not the respondent's usual or last known residence; new evidence regarding an alleged agreement on address for service was not admissible as it was not before the lower court and failed Ladd v Marshall criteria; no important point of principle or compelling reason for second appeal.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Application for permission for second appeal dismissed