Service MCQs Flashcards
The Bristol District Registry of the High Court issued a claim for Meera, a litigant in person, on 2 May this year. The claim is against her accountants for substantial damages for negligent advice relating to her business, which she operates solely within the jurisdiction. Her accountants have their principal office in Bristol.
Meera notified the court office that she wished to serve the claim form herself. Time passes and, on 6 October this year, Meera realises that she has not yet served the claim form.
Which ONE of the following statements is CORRECT?
Meera is out of time for serving the claim form. She may apply to the court to exercise its discretion to extend time for service and the application must be made with notice given to the accountants.
Meera is out of time for serving the claim form. However, the court may make an order to extend the time for service. The court may only make such an order if Meera can show that she has taken all reasonable steps to serve the claim form in time but has been unable to do so and that she acted promptly in making the application.
Meera is out of time for serving the claim form and may not apply for an extension of time for service because the application would be made outside the period for serving the claim form.
Meera has until 2 November to serve the claim form because service is to be within the jurisdiction.
Meera is out of time for serving the claim form. However, the court may make an order to extend the time for service. The court may only make such an order if Meera can show that she has taken all reasonable steps to serve the claim form in time but has been unable to do so and that she acted promptly in making the application.
See CPR rules 7.5 and 7.6(3).
The claimant must complete the relevant step required by CPR rule 7.5(1) BEFORE 12.00 midnight on the calendar day four months after the date of issue of the claim form. This four-month period applies for service within the jurisdiction.
The four-month period has expired but Meera may apply for an extension of time for serving the claim form pursuant to CPR rule 7.6(3).
The application for an extension of time may be without notice: CPR rule 7.6(4).
A claimant limited company wished to serve a claim form upon the defendant, also a limited company, by way of personal service pursuant to Part 6 of the CPR. The claimant has no desire to use any of the methods for service contained within the Companies Act 2006. In an attempt to effect personal service under Part 6 of the CPR, therefore, the claim form was handed to the junior accounts clerk at the defendant company’s principal office.
Which ONE of the following statements is CORRECT?
The attempted service of the claim form will be valid if the accounts clerk provides the individual serving the claim form with a signed confirmation stating that she accepts service.
Service of the claim form will be valid if it has been served by an employee holding a senior position within the claimant company.
There has been valid service of the claim form.
The attempted service of the claim form is invalid.
The attempted service of the claim form is invalid.
Service has not been validly effected on the above set of facts.
CPR rule 6.5(3)(b) provides that a claim form is served personally on a company “by leaving it with a person holding a senior position within the company”. The definition of “senior person” is set out in PD6A paragraph 6.2. The junior accounts clerk does not fall within that definition, such that valid service has not been effected.
The position held by the person serving the claim form is irrelevant. Nor does it assist matters if the accounts clerk provides the individual serving the claim form with a signed confirmation stating that she accepts service.
Practically, if you were advising the claimant in this situation, you might suggest that the claimant rely on CPR rule 6.15(2) (which is on the syllabus) to ‘save’ the situation, though the giving of such advice is wholly outwith the scope of this question; it is still useful to consider from the point of view of practice, however.
A claimant issued a high-value, personal injury claim within the limitation period at the Cardiff District Registry of the High Court three and a half months ago. The claimant delayed effecting service of the claim form. The claimant and the defendant are based in Wales.
Yesterday, a without prejudice discussion took place, which was very productive. You are now instructed that the parties strongly believe that a settlement is likely to be reached within the next 21 days. The claimant simply needs to establish the extent of his loss of earnings claim and will need to contact his current and former employers to provide this information. Both his current and former employers have indicated that they expect to be able to provide this information within 14 days.
The claimant wishes to keep costs to a minimum.
Which of the following is the BEST ADVICE for the claimant’s solicitor?
Delay serving the claim form for 21 days as a settlement is looking likely.
Demand a negotiation tomorrow.
Serve the claim form forthwith. At the same time, invite the Defendant’s solicitors to sign a consent order to be filed in support of the claimant’s immediate application to the court seeking a stay of one month to attempt to settle the claim. The application should be made very promptly.
Serve the claim form and do nothing else.
Serve the claim form forthwith. At the same time, invite the Defendant’s solicitors to sign a consent order to be filed in support of the claimant’s immediate application to the court seeking a stay of one month to attempt to settle the claim. The application should be made very promptly.
Correct
This is the best advice to give.
This advice ensues that the claim form is validly served within the jurisdiction within the four-month time limit. See CPR rule 7.5(1). (The “jurisdiction”, defined in CPR rule 2.3, includes England and Wales.) Your prime duty is to ensure that the claim form is validly served.
This advice also helps to keep costs to a minimum were a stay to be granted (which is likely where a consent order is filed in these terms).
Laura is a litigant in person. Jesse is represented by Dangerfields Solicitors. In responding to Laura’s letter before action, Jessie gave, in writing, Dangerfields Solicitors’ business address within the jurisdiction as an address at which Jessie could be served with the claim form. Laura then caused a claim form to be issued and, having notified the court of her desire to serve the claim form herself, then purported to serve Jessie personally (and in the United Kingdom) with the claim form (in circumstances where personal service was not mandated by an enactment, rule or practice direction). Laura realised her error before the time period for effecting service of the claim form had expired but did nothing to correct it, despite the fact that she might easily have done so. The period within which the claim form should have been served has now expired and Laura brings an application for the court retroactively to extend the time within which service of the claim form may be effected. When confronted with this application, what is the MOST LIKELY decision that the court will reach?
The court will reject Laura’s application out of hand because it is made after the expiration of the period set out in the CPR within which service of the claim form within the jurisdiction must be effected. The court has no power to grant an extension of time after that period has expired.
The court will grant Laura the extension of time which she seeks. Where an application is made after the period within which service of the claim form should be effected, the court is obliged to grant that application, no matter the circumstances of the case.
The court is likely to grant Laura the extension of time which she seeks. It is sufficient that she has, on the facts, taken all reasonable steps to serve the claim form properly within the specified time period.
The court is likely to refuse to grant the extension which Laura seeks. Laura realised her mistake in good time and could have easily rectified it. That she chose not to, and that she then made an application after the expiry of the period within which service of the claim form should have been effected, is likely to count against her in the eyes of the court, such that her application is likely to be rejected.
The court is likely to refuse to grant the extension which Laura seeks. Laura realised her mistake in good time and could have easily rectified it. That she chose not to, and that she then made an application after the expiry of the period within which service of the claim form should have been effected, is likely to count against her in the eyes of the court, such that her application is likely to be rejected.
The court is MOST LIKELY to reach the decision set out in this answer. Laura was required to serve the claim form at Dangerfields Solicitors’ business address pursuant to CPR rule 6.7. On the facts of the case, it appears that the claimant, Laura, has not taken all reasonable steps to comply with CPR rule 7.5. See CPR rule 7.6(3). In Nanglegan v Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 237 (mentioned in the second sub-paragraph of the commentary at 7.6.3 in the White Book 2022), the claimant served the claim on the defendant when solicitors had been nominated. The claimant realised the mistake and could have faxed the claim form to the defendant’s solicitors within the four month period for service. The claimant’s application for a retrospective extension of time was rejected. It is wrong to say that the court has no power to grant an extension after the time for service has expired. However, the court may only grant the extension where the conditions in CPR rule 7.6(3) are made out. That does not appear to be the case here. It is therefore wrong to say that the court will or is likely to grant Laura the extension of time.
Seven days have passed since the day on which a claim form and particulars of claim for damages for negligent advice were deemed to have been served on Rosa, a financial adviser.
Assuming that the claim form and particulars of claim were deemed to have been served on the same day, which ONE of the following statements is WRONG?
Rosa now has up to 7 days to file an acknowledgment of service.
If Rosa does not file an acknowledgment of service, she has another 14 days within which to file a defence.
If Rosa files an acknowledgment of service today, she has another 21 days within which to file a defence.
Rosa now has up to 7 days to file a defence, if she decides not to file an acknowledgment of service first.
If Rosa does not file an acknowledgment of service, she has another 14 days within which to file a defence.
This statement is WRONG and is therefore the CORRECT answer.
If Rosa does not file an acknowledgment of service, she has another 7 days (NOT 14 days) within which to file a defence. The basic period for filing a defence is 14 days after service of the claim form. As 7 days have already passed, Rosa has another 7 days in which to file a defence. See CPR rule 15.4(1)(a).
If Rosa files an acknowledgment of service, she has 21 days left of the 28 days within which to file a defence. See CPR rule 15.4(1)(b).
Food Limited recently issued proceedings against Dodd & Co Limited for breach of contract. The claim form and Particulars of Claim were served on Dodd & Co Limited on 29 July. On 8 August Food Limited entered judgment in default of an acknowledgment of service.
Which ONE of the following statements is CORRECT?
The court may set aside the default judgment if Dodd & Co Limited has no real prospect of successfully defending the claim.
The court may set aside the default judgment if Dodd & Co Limited has a real prospect of successfully sending the claim.
The court must set aside the default judgment because the time limit for the filing of an acknowledgment of service or a defence had not expired.
The court may set aside the default judgment if Dodd & Co Limited can show a triable issue.
The court must set aside the default judgment because the time limit for the filing of an acknowledgment of service or a defence had not expired.
Dodd & Co Limited had 14 days to file an acknowledgment of service (under CPR rule 10.3(1)) or a defence (under rule CPR 15.4(1)). However, judgment in default was entered BEFORE 14 days had expired since the service of the claim form and the Particulars of Claim on 29 July. Therefore, Food Limited was not entitled to default judgment under CPR rule 12.3(1). As the default judgment was wrongly entered, the court MUST set it aside under CPR rule 13.2
The question of whether Dodd & Co Limited has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim under CPR rule 13.3 never arises. Note that the test under CPR rule 13.3 is NOT whether there is a triable issue.
‘JJ Builders & Son’ have made a claim against ‘Payless’. Payless have been advised that they should make a counterclaim.
Which ONE of the following statements is CORRECT?
The particulars of counterclaim must be filed within 28 days of the defence, otherwise Payless will need the court’s permission to file it.
The particulars of counterclaim must be filed with the defence, otherwise Payless will need the court’s permission to file it.
The particulars of counterclaim is not required as the counterclaim can be dealt with as part of the defence.
The particulars of counterclaim must be filed within 28 days of the defence. The court’s permission is not required to file it if Payless obtain consent from JJ Builders & Son.
The particulars of counterclaim must be filed with the defence, otherwise Payless will need the court’s permission to file it.
Payless may make a counterclaim against JJ Builders & Son by filing particulars of counterclaim (CPR 20.4(1)) and it must file its particulars of counterclaim with its defence or at any other time with the court’s permission (CPR 20.4(2)).
Yesterday, Andrew, a motorist, brought proceedings against Westway Council for damages for breach of statutory duty (owed by Westway Council under the Highways Act 1980). Westway Council has not yet filed a defence. The relevant repair work had been carried out by independent contractors and Westway Council wishes to join those independent contractors to the proceedings.
Which ONE of the following statements is the CORRECT advice to give to Westway Council in this situation?
Westway Council may make an additional claim against the independent contractors by making an application to the court for an order that the independent contractors be added as an additional party.
Westway Council may make an additional claim against the independent contractors, but the court’s permission is always required in order to make an additional claim.
Westway Council may make an additional claim for a contribution or indemnity against the independent contractors by filing a notice containing the nature and grounds of the additional claim.
Westway Council may make an additional claim against the independent contractors without the permission of the court provided the appropriate claim form is issued before or at the same time as the defence is filed.
Westway Council may make an additional claim against the independent contractors without the permission of the court provided the appropriate claim form is issued before or at the same time as the defence is filed.
Westway may make an additional claim against the independent contractors under CPR 20.2 and as the independent contractors are not an existing party the procedure for making this additional claim is as set out in CPR 20.7. This rule provides that the additional claim is made when the court issues the appropriate claim form and this can be done without the court’s permission if the additional claim is issued before or at the same time as the defence is filed.
Question 2
A claim form is served by first class post on Friday 2 April. The particulars of claim is
delivered to a permitted address at 5pm on the following Thursday 8 April. The next day is
Good Friday and the Monday 12 April is also a bank holiday, being Easter Monday.
Which of the following statements gives the correct days of deemed service?
A The claim form is deemed served on Tuesday 6 April; the particulars of claim is
deemed served on Tuesday 13 April.
B The claim form is deemed served on Monday 5 April; the particulars of claim is
deemed served on Thursday 8 April.
C The claim form is deemed served on Tuesday 6 April; the particulars of claim is
deemed served on Friday 9 April.
D The claim form is deemed served on Tuesday 6 April; the particulars of claim is
deemed served on Monday 12 April.
E The claim form is deemed served on Monday 5 April; the particulars of claim is
deemed served on Tuesday 13 April.
Answer
Option A is correct. Under the rules, the claim form is deemed served on the second
business day after the step required (here sending by first class post) has occurred.
Monday 5 April is a business day, as is Tuesday 6 April so the claim form is deemed served
on the Tuesday. However, different rules apply to other documents.
The particulars of claim was delivered to the permitted address at 5pm. Even though
Thursday 8 April is a business day, it was delivered after the ‘cut- off’ time of 4.30pm, so this
date is not the day of deemed service. Service will be effected on the next business day,
which is Tuesday 13 April because both Friday and Monday are bank holidays. The other
options are wrong because one or more of the dates given do not accurately describe the
dates of deemed service.
You are instructed by James Peach Ltd (“JP Ltd”). JP Ltd designs kitchens. It has recently become embroiled in a dispute with one of its customers, Muna Hangos Ltd (“MH Ltd”). JP Ltd and MH Ltd entered into a contract pursuant to which JP Ltd would design and fit a kitchen for MH Ltd and MH Ltd would, in turn, pay the sum of £22,500. JP Ltd designed and fitted the kitchen but MH Ltd has refused to pay the sum of money in question, arguing that both the design and fitting of the kitchen is not in keeping with the terms of the contract into which the parties had entered.
After an unsuccessful attempt at alternative dispute resolution, JP Ltd now wishes to serve a claim form, within the jurisdiction, on MH Ltd, claiming £22,500. Which ONE of the following is the CORRECT advice to give to JP Ltd in order for it to achieve its stated objective?
JP Ltd must complete the relevant step required in relation to the particular method of service chosen, before 12.00 midnight on the calendar day six months after the date of issue of the claim form.
JP Ltd does not need to do anything further in order to meet its stated objective. It is sufficient that the claim form is issued.
JP Ltd must complete the relevant step required in relation to the particular method of service chosen, before 12.00 midnight on the calendar day four months after the date of issue of the claim form.
The claim form must be served within six months of the date of issue.
JP Ltd must complete the relevant step required in relation to the particular method of service chosen, before 12.00 midnight on the calendar day four months after the date of issue of the claim form.
This answer is correct. JP Ltd’s stated objective is to serve the claim form within the jurisdiction. Accordingly, JP Ltd must comply with CPR 7.5(1), the text of which is, insofar as relevant, set out in this answer. Of course, the exact step which has to be taken depends on the particular method of service chosen but the information which you need in order to advise on the step is not given to you here and does not form part of the question asked. It is, however, something to consider when giving advice in practice.
You act for Supasaver who are a large supermarket chain and the Defendant to an action being brought by their employee, Miss Susanna Kirk. The basis of the claim is that Miss Kirk parked in a Supasaver carpark on 24 February 2020, alighted from her car and walked across the car park to begin her shift. She says that her right foot went into a pothole in the carpark and that as a result she fell and sustained injuries. She instructed solicitors to begin a claim on her behalf and was ex-amined for the purposes of a medical report about her injuries. Her diagnosis was one of a soft-tissue injury to her ankle as well as grazing to her hand. All of her injuries were fully resolved by October 2020. Miss Kirk alleges that her injury was caused as a result of the Defendant breaching their obligations as both employer and occupier by not keeping the carpark in good repair.
In a personal injury case what should be served with the particulars of claim?
A schedule of any past and future losses and expenses and one of the Claimant’s utility bills should be served with the particulars of claim.
A schedule of any past and future losses and expenses and the Claimant’s relevant medical records should be served with the particulars of claim.
A schedule of any past and future losses and expenses and a medical report should be served with the particulars of claim.
A schedule of any past and future losses and expenses and a copy of the Claimant’s birth certificate should be served with the particulars of claim.
A schedule of any past and future losses and expenses and a medical report should be served with the particulars of claim.
This is correct - please see PD16 4.1. In terms of the other answers, neither the Claimant’s birth certificate, medical records nor utility bills need to be served.
Organic Kitchens Limited (‘Organic’) provided Bernard with 12 white kitchen units pursuant to an express term of their written contract. It was an express term that Bernard would pay £12,000 for those items. Bernard wrote to Organic saying the units were not of satisfactory quality, but got no reply. Bernard has not paid for the kitchen units and there has been no further correspondence.
Three months later, on 1st June, Bernard received a claim form and Particulars of Claim from Organic claiming payment of the £12,000. Bernard recognised these as starting a claim against him and intended to make an appointment for legal advice. After 12 days, he attended a free initial appointment with a solicitor, Jane, who urged him to act urgently to respond to the claim as time was quickly running out and Bernard may lose the opportunity to respond. She advised him to make a further appointment so that a response could be drafted. Bernard did not make an appointment and did nothing further.
On 27th June, Organic obtained default judgment. On receipt of this, Bernard again took no action.
On 8th August, Bernard attends a full appointment with Jane who suggests an application to set aside the judgement. Your advice is now sought on whether the default judgment will be set aside. What is the BEST ADVICE to give Bernard?
The Court should set aside the default judgement as it was improperly entered just 27 days after the service of Particulars before the relevant time for acknowledging service or filing a Defence had expired.
As Bernard only attended a full appointment with a legal advisor after the judgment was entered, the Court may set aside the default judgment for ‘some other good reason’.
There is a real risk here that the Court may refuse to set aside judgment because Bernard has been so slow in applying to set default judgment aside.
The Court is likely to find Bernard has real prospects of successfully defending and therefore set aside the default judgment.
There is a real risk here that the Court may refuse to set aside judgment because Bernard has been so slow in applying to set default judgment aside.
CORRECT – this answer is the best advice. Under r.13.3(2) the matter to which the court must have regard include whether the person seeking to set aside the judgment made an application to do so promptly. Although ‘real prospects of successfully defending’ forms part of the relevant test, you need to consider all aspects of the test before the Court when giving your advice. The default judgment was also entered properly and there are strong reasons on the facts as to why the Court may refuse to set aside default judgment for ‘some other good reason’.
