Case number: BL-2024-001074 - [2025] EWHC 2954 (Ch)

Mr. Hill was made bankrupt as long ago as 24 July 2018. The case on behalf of the Trustees is that Mr. Hill has claimed that he has no assets or very limited assets since the early 1990s and he has been failing to pay creditors since the 1980s. The Trustees point to the very valuable properties that Mr. Hill has lived in during that period in Florida, the Bahamas and Windsor and the expensive litigation in which he has been involved in a number of jurisdictions.

I'm not concerned save in one respect as to the merits of the claim but I have read the Particulars of Claim and in essence the Trustees’ case is that there have been a series of transactions by which the value of assets has been transferred from Mr. Hill to a series of entities and those transactions can be impugned pursuant to section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986. The Trustees further assert that three trusts set up by Mr. Hill or on his behalf, namely a trust set up in the Isle of Man known as the Condor trust; a settlement called the Falcon Settlement also established in the Isle of Man and a Jersey discretionary trust known as the Falcon Trust were all shams.

The claim form in this matter was issued on 23 July 2024 and insofar as a six-year limitation period applies that was right at the very end of that period. On 2 January 2025 the Trustees issued an application without notice seeking permission to serve out of the jurisdiction and an extension of time to serve the claim form. This was of course some time after the claim form had been issued and when the time for serving the claim form was due to expire on 23 January 2025. On 8 January 2025 there was a hearing before Deputy Master Linwood at which he gave permission to serve out of the jurisdiction and extended time for service until 22 April 2025. He provided in paragraph 7 of the Order that: “The defendants (or any of them) are entitled to apply to set aside paragraphs 1-2 and 4 of this order pursuant to rule 23.10 of the Civil Procedure rules 1998 within 28 days of service of this order upon them or (in case of any defendant that is currently dissolved) within 28 days of the date of their restoration whichever is the later.”

On 22 January 2025 Stewarts, solicitors for the Trustees sent a covering letter dated 19 January 2025 enclosing the claim form, particulars of claim and other documents to Mr. Hill by e-mail. It is common ground that on 22 January 2025 Mrs. Hill and another defendant, Casa Marisol de Augustin LLC were served personally by Ms. Schutska a process server at Mr and Mrs. Hill's home at 53 Avista Circle St Augustine Florida. I will come back to what exactly occurred on that occasion as it is important to the question of whether service was properly effected on Mr. Hill by way of substituted service.

It is the Trustees’ case that Mr. Hill was served by way of substituted service through Mrs. Hill at their Florida address on 25 January 2025. That issue has become a crucial and hard fought matter in this case. Mr. Hill's case is that he was not properly served on 25 January but he accepts that a few days later he found the papers that were left by Ms. Schutska.

On 9 February and therefore some time after having discovered the papers Mr. Hill contacted a barrister he knew in London who recommended his current solicitors to him. In fact, he initially instructed Russell Cooke solicitors who filed an acknowledgment of service on his behalf on 13 February 2025 stating that he intended to defend all of the claim. The acknowledgment of service did not indicate that he contested the jurisdiction of the court in any way.

The covering letter enclosing the acknowledgment of service dated 13 February 2025 sought an extension of time for Mr. Hill to file his defence to Friday 30 May 2025 and requested a hard copy of the documents referred to in the covering letter of 19 January 2025. On 18 February 2025 Stewarts wrote to Russell Cooke refusing the long extension that had been sought for filing of the defence but offering an in between solution of an extension to 10 March 2025. The contents of that letter have attained some significance, and I will set them out in full here: “We note your request for hard copy copies of the documents listed in our 19 January 2025 letter to your client. We can arrange for hard copy documents to be sent to your offices, however we can instead provide a file transfer link containing the documents as served on your client, which were also sent to him by email on 22 January 2025. Please confirm your preference here. Going forward we confirm we are willing to accept service (on behalf of the Claimants) of documents in the proceedings by email to [email protected] but please note that email and combined attachment size should not exceed 40MB.Please confirm if you are willing to accept service on behalf of your client by email, and if so the email address or email addresses to which documents must be sent and any limitations to your agreement to accept service by email (to include the format and maximum size of attachments).”

Russell Cooke responded to that letter on 19 February agreeing the extension proposed by Stewarts and stating that “We confirm that we agree to accept service of documentation in these proceedings by email” and later: “We are willing to accept an electronic file transfer link containing the documents served on our client We would be grateful if you could provide that linkt... at your earliest convenience.”

The same day Stewarts sent a link to Russell Cooke attaching the documents. It is the Trustees’ case that this was effective service of those documents on Mr. Hill, even if service on him in Florida was not effective.

On 20 February 2025, Mr. Hill changed solicitors and Simon Burn went on the record. There followed some correspondence between Stewarts and Simon Burn.

It is the Trustees’ case that time for making an application to set aside the order of Deputy Master Linwood expired on 22 February 2025 on the basis that he was served on 25 January 2025. Application was in fact made on 6 March as set out above, 12 days after the time limit expired if service was effective on 25 January and in time if it was effected on 19 February 2025.