McAlpine Ltd v Richardson Roofing Co Ltd [2022] EWHC 982 (TCC) (01 April 2022)

McAlpine Ltd v Richardson Roofing Co Ltd [2022] EWHC 982 (TCC) (01 April 2022)

There was no explicit or clear written indication by the defendant's solicitors that they would accept service by email, and the notice of acting does not constitute a 'response to a claim' for the purposes of Practice Direction 6A. Therefore, service of the particulars of claim by email was not valid.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 982 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd; Defendant: Richardson Roofing Co Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Interlocutory Application Regarding Validity of Service of Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Application for declaration of valid service by email refused.
Legal Topics
Service of Documents, Practice Direction 6 a, Email Service, Interpretation of Procedural Rules
Civil Procedure Construction Law Service of Documents Practice Direction 6 a Email Service Interpretation of Procedural Rules

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd

Claimant

Richardson Roofing Co Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (technology and Construction Court) / Interlocutory Application Regarding Validity of Service of Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of particulars of claim by email was valid under Practice Direction 6A
  2. 2 Whether inclusion of an email address on a notice of acting constitutes written indication of willingness to accept service by email
  3. 3 Whether a notice of acting is a 'response to a claim' for the purposes of Practice Direction 6A 4.1(2)(c)

Ratio Decidendi

There was no explicit or clear written indication by the defendant's solicitors that they would accept service by email, and the notice of acting does not constitute a 'response to a claim' for the purposes of Practice Direction 6A. Therefore, service of the particulars of claim by email was not valid.

Court Disposition

Application for declaration of valid service by email refused.

Orders

  • No valid service of particulars of claim by email on 18 March 2022.