0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

service of a claim form – take care when serving at the 'last known address'

23 May 2014

In Norcross v Constantine the court held that service of a claim form at a defendant’s last known address was not good service under CPR r.6.9 where the claimants had reason to believe the defendant no longer lived there.

This case concerned an application to set aside a judgment obtained in default of an acknowledgment of service. The claim form was served at the defendant’s last known address under CPR r6.9(2). However, the claimants had previously been told that the defendant had moved and had been out of the jurisdiction since 2009. Therefore, an application was made to set aside judgment because service was defective.

The application was granted as it was clear from the evidence that the claimants had reason to believe that the defendant no longer resided at the address under r6.9(3). The test was objective and the claimants could not simply ignore that information. As they had failed to take the reasonable steps required by r.6.9(3), service was defective and the default judgment was set aside.

This case highlights the need to consider all information when ascertaining the ‘last known address’ in order to serve court documents.

related opinions

High Court finds against WASPI women

The High Court has rejected the judicial review claim brought by the campaign group BackTo60 against the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP).

View blog

The importance of three magic words: subject to contract

A recent case illustrates the importance of ensuring that all emails discussing the terms of a proposed acquisition are headed ‘subject to contract’.

View blog

Vegetarianism is not a philosophical belief under the Equality Act 2010

In its Judgment earlier this month, the Tribunal considered whether vegetarianism is capable of being a philosophical belief capable of protection under the Equality Act 2010.

View blog

Time to increase the £25,000 cap on contractual claims in the Employment Tribunal?

The recent case of Ugradar v Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust has highlighted that the current cap on contractual claims that can be awarded in the Employment Tribunals is outdated and capable of producing real injustice.

View blog

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up