UK: Normal Service - Hills v Struth

Last Updated: 14 October 2013
Article by Jane Lemon

In this recent decision of Ramsey J, the TCC considered whether sending a photocopy of a claim form by post or DX amounts to valid service. In addition, there is a useful comparison in the judgment of the court's approach to relief from sanctions under the old CPR 3.9 and the new version, which applies to all applications made post 1st April 2013.

The claimant was a building contractor engaged by the defendants to demolish and rebuild their house pursuant to a JCT Intermediate Form of Contract. Shortly before Christmas 2012, the final certificate was issued. Given the potentially conclusive effect of that certificate, the claimant commenced proceedings without having complied with the Pre-Action Protocol and in circumstances where it was not in a position to serve particulars of claim. As a result, the claim form was not immediately served on the defendants.

Instead, following a phone call in which the claimant's solicitor proposed that proceedings be stayed to observe the Protocol, he sent a letter by DX to the defendants' solicitor stating that it was enclosing "a copy of the issued Claim Form" and looking forward to receiving a response to the proposed stay. A photocopy of the sealed claim form accompanied the letter.

The defendants' solicitor responded several weeks, later accepting the claimant's solicitor's letter as service of the claim form and arguing that the claimant had failed to serve its particulars within the required 14-day period. The claimant was told either to serve particulars within a further 14 days or make acceptable proposals in relation to a protocol meeting, failing which the defendants would apply to have the claim struck out. The claimant's solicitor immediately responded, arguing that the claim form had not been served but unfortunately the defendants' solicitor never received that letter.

The claimant's solicitor assumed that the subsequent lack of response indicated an acceptance of his position in relation to service and took no further protective measures.

However, the defendants' solicitor, having not received the letter, proceeded to make a successful application to strike out the claim form without the need for a hearing. The claimant then applied to vary or set aside that order and, in the alternative, to extend time for service of the particulars.

Had the claim form been served?

The first issue that the court had to decide was whether sending a photocopy of the sealed claim form by DX amounted to good service. If it did not, then the particulars were not yet due for service and the strike out application was misconceived.

The claimant submitted that the claim form that has to be served when serving by post or DX is the form issued by the court and not a photocopy of it. It relied upon the notes at 6.2.3 and 6.3.13 of the White Book, together with obiter dicta of the Court of Appeal in Murphy v Staples UK Limited [2003] 1 WLR 2441, in which the claimant sent the sealed claim form by first class post to the defendant's registered office and, in addition, sent a photocopy to the defendant's solicitors.

The Court of Appeal decided that service on the defendant's registered offices constituted good service but went on to consider the position if service should have been on the solicitors:

"...the only flaw in the process was that (the claimant's solicitor) sent a copy of the issued form, rather than the original document itself. In this regard, it is to be noted that, if (the claimant's solicitor) had sent the issued claim form to (the defendant's solicitor) by fax, that would have been good service.

A document received by fax is a copy document...(the defendant's solicitor) received a document served by one of the permitted methods of service (i.e. by first class post on the right person at the right address) but it was a copy of the document that should have been served..."

The defendants argued that the CPR does not expressly provide that a claim form bearing an original seal has to be served but rather envisages that it does not because it permits service by fax or other means of communication.

They further relied upon Weston v Bates [2013] 1 WLR 189, a first instance decision in which service by email out of the jurisdiction was held to be good service.

The court was referred in that case to the decision in Murphy but the judge found that although reference was made in that decision to the "original" claim form, there was no discussion as to what was meant by that phrase.

The judge went on to find that so far as the CPR is concerned "what constitutes a claim form is a matter of substance. The words 'claim form' are not a reference to a particular hard copy of a document".

In addition, the defendants relied upon the decision in Asia Pacific v Hanjin Shipping [2005] EWHC 2443, in which the court held that the question of whether a claim form had been served must be judged objectively by looking at what was done and said by the parties.

The defendants argued that if a claim form is delivered in a manner provided for by the rules it is served unless the claimant makes clear he is not in fact serving it, which was not done in this case.

Having considered the above arguments, Ramsey J held that, as a general rule, the claim form is the form issued and sealed by the court.

He relied in support upon CPR 7.2(1), which provides that proceedings are started when the court issues a claim form, and CPR 2.6(1), which provides that the court must seal the claim form on issue.

He therefore went on to find that when CPR 6.3(1) states that a claim form may be served by any of the prescribed methods, as a general rule it is the document issued and sealed by the court that is the relevant claim form.

However, there are exceptions to this rule. When a claim form is served by fax or other electronic means, then necessarily the original will not be served. A claimant serving a claim form by such a method would additionally have to serve the original sealed version if it were not for paragraph 4.3 of Practice Direction 6A, which provides that service of a hard copy in such circumstances is not required.

Ramsey J held that great weight must be given to Murphy and it was evident from the judgment of Dyson LJ in that case that a copy of the claim form was not sufficient and that what was required was a document originally issued and sealed by the court. For those reasons, he held that "in this case the photocopy of the claim form which was sent by Document Exchange...was not the document required for service to be achieved under CPR 6.3".

As to Weston v Bates, he noted that the question in that case was whether the order granting permission for service out of the jurisdiction required service of the original sealed claim form.

When deciding that it did not, the judge accepted that the requirements for service within the jurisdiction could not be imported into the requirements for service out of the jurisdiction. It was no more than an aid for construction.

Ramsey J then considered the position if he was wrong and the claim form was a version capable of amounting to good service.

He applied the objective test referred to in Hanjin and found that what had been done and said by the parties in this case could not be construed as showing an intention to serve.

Should an extension be granted for service of the particulars of claim?

The court then went on to consider the alternative application for an extension of time pursuant to CPR 3.1(2)(a) on the assumption that it had come to a different view and found that the claim form had been served. In such circumstances, that application would have been made after time for service of the particulars had expired and therefore the provisions of CPR 3.9 relating to relief from sanctions applied (Roberts v Momentum Service [2003] 1 WLR 1577).

However, given that the application predated 1st April 2013, the recent amendments to CPR 3.9 were not applicable and instead the checklist set out in the old version applied.

Ramsey J held, with some hesitation, that an extension would be granted, given the unusual circumstances of the case. The fact that the claimant's solicitor was seeking agreement of a stay meant that it was inappropriate for him to incur costs drafting particulars and his missing letter to the defendant's solicitor provided an explanation for the delay in making the application.

However, he went on to state that he was "quite clear that given the change to the overriding objective and to CPR 3.9, if this application had been made after 1 April 2013, it would not have been granted. The need for compliance with the rules, practice, directions and orders now forms an essential part of the CPR".

This seems like a harsh result given that the failure to comply was not intentional and the missing letter effectively deprived the claimant of the opportunity to take protective measures to avoid a strike out application.

It underlines the strict approach the court is likely to take when dealing with any application for relief from sanctions after 1 April 2013 and the importance of seeking extensions of time before time limits have already passed.

The articles and papers published by Keating Chambers are for the purpose of raising general awareness of issues and stimulating discussion. The contents must not be relied upon or applied in any given situation. There is no substitute for taking appropriate professional advice.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions