The Guidance reasonably available to WFW at the time of submitting the documents to the FPS for service
The Guidance reasonably available to WFW at the time of submitting the documents to the FPS for service
Both parties considered it relevant, and I agree, to consider what guidance was reasonably available to WFW (or Ince & Co. before them) when they were taking steps to serve the Defendants under Article 5 of the Hague Convention.
There were three principal sources of guidance.
The specific guidance relating to service in Brazil provided to Ince & Co. on 23 June 2023 by the FPS.
The Hague Convention website for Brazil, which provided no real guidance beyond a requirement for translations into Portuguese.
The UK government’s website. This provides generic advice relating to service of legal documents overseas rather than being specific to service in Brazil under Article 5.
The FPS now publishes on its website a checklist for service pursuant to Article 5 of the Hague Convention, which sets out the steps to be taken to ensure that any request for service complies with the Convention and can be processed and forwarded on a timely basis. The FPS also now publishes a spreadsheet with a specific list of requirements for individual countries with entries as to the specific requirements for Brazil. It is, however, common ground that neither the checklist nor the spreadsheet had been published prior to early 2025.
- 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)