Dispute resolution

Service outside the jurisdiction

Published on 17th Apr 2024

English courts appear to have slightly relaxed the rules on extending time for service out of the jurisdiction in some cases

People in a meeting and close up of a gavel

Although claimants get slightly longer to serve claim forms on defendants who are outside the jurisdiction (and have not nominated English solicitors to accept service on their behalf) – six months rather than four months for service within the jurisdiction – that is sometimes still not enough time.

The general advice is to get on with service as soon as you have issued proceedings in England. However, the courts may be taking a slightly more relaxed approach at the moment.

In Szrek & Ors v Div-Ing DOO & Ors, the Foreign Process Section (FPS) of the English High Court – which deals with service out of the jurisdiction – had advised the claimant that it can take up to five months to serve in Croatia (the defendant's home country) and that all relevant documents have to be translated before sending to Croatia. The judge said that "Taking this period of time for translation work to be done and for service to take place, I consider that the requested extension period of 8 months is appropriate".

What is interesting about this case is that the application to extend time was made only two months before the expiry of the six-month deadline for service out of the jurisdiction. Despite that, the judge found that the claimant had taken all reasonable steps to deal with the matter expeditiously.

This slightly more relaxed approach may be being driven by the considerable backlog being dealt with by the FPS post-lockdown (the FPS having suspended its services for a period during lockdown).

In another recent decision, Various Claimants v Nissan Motor Co Ltd & Ors, the judge accepted that it would not be possible to serve in time because of "the well-known delays of the Foreign Process Department" and accordingly allowed the claimant to carry out alternative service (by email on London solicitors, even though those solicitors had advised that they were not authorised to accept service).

Share

* This article is current as of the date of its publication and does not necessarily reflect the present state of the law or relevant regulation.

Connect with one of our experts

Interested in hearing more from Osborne Clarke?