Tom Poole KC acted for the successful appellant instructed by Pinder Reaux Solicitors.
Cotter J held that Senior Master Fontaine had erred in setting aside permission to serve notice of proceedings by an alternative method, namely email. Cotter J held that the Senior Master had failed to take account of relevant evidence and made a finding of fact which was not open to her on the evidence. This decision provides useful guidance on CPR 6.9 and its relationship with CPR 6.15. It also guides that the “reasonable steps” the claimant must take to ascertain the address of the defendant’s current residence or place of business under CPR 6.9(3) will depend on the facts of each case and on the court’s view of those facts, taking everything into account. Since 2008, reported decisions regarding CPR 6.9 have been infrequent so this decision is extremely helpful.
Read the full judgment here.
Please contact us either by telephone: +44 (0)20 7415 7800 or email: clerks@3harecourt.com
