“… allows a reasonable margin, while still respecting the reasons for the default validity period and the importance of speedy service.”
“… allows a reasonable margin, while still respecting the reasons for the default validity period and the importance of speedy service.”
The order was granted on 22 September 2023 by Calver J. (“the First Extension Order”), but it was not until 04 October 2024 that documents were lodged with the FPS which complied with the requirements for service in Brazil.
On 07 November 2024, the Claimants applied (without notice) under CPR r.7.6(2) for a further extension of time for service of the Claim Form to 15 November 2025, which was granted (on paper as requested) by Knowles J. on 14 November 2024 subject to a liberty to the Defendants to apply to set aside that order (“the Second Extension Order”).
The Claimants obtained an order from Foxton J. permitting them to effect service of the Claim Form by alternative means on 14 April 2025 (“the Alternative Service Order”).
On 22 April 2025, the Claim Form was served on the Defendants by the alternative methods permitted by the Alternative Service Order.
The Defendants apply in accordance with the liberty in the Second Extension Order to set aside that extension of time for service of the Claim Form. The Defendants further submit that if that application is successful, then the Claim Form should be set aside and the Court should decline to exercise jurisdiction in the matter.
The basis for the Defendants’ application is that:
The evidence before the Court failed to provide sufficient justification for the giving of an extension, and none existed; and
The Claimants failed to give proper disclosure when making the application.
- Heading
- Mr. Nigel Cooper KC
- “… allows a reasonable margin, while still respecting the reasons for the default validity period and the importance of speedy service.”
- The relevant legal principles
- Background
- Section 5
- The Guidance reasonably available to WFW at the time of submitting the documents to the FPS for service
- Were there good reasons for the Claimants’ failure to serve the Claim Form within its period of initial validity?
- Was there a breach of the duty of full and frank disclosure?
- Conclusions
![[2025] EWHC 2941 (Comm)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_WAai98v.png)