Pitfalls on Service of Claim Form on a Nominated Solicitor
The case of Keilaus v Houghton [2024] EWHC 2108 serves as a critical reminder for legal practitioners about the consequences of failing to serve a claim form correctly when a solicitor has agreed to accept service on behalf of a defendant. In this case, the claimant’s action was dismissed because their solicitor failed to recognise that the defendant’s solicitor had already confirmed they would accept service. Despite subsequent correspondence requesting confirmation, the court held that service had not been correctly effected, resulting in the claim being struck out.
The Key Rules Governing Service of Claim Forms
Under CPR 6.7, if a defendant nominates an address or their solicitor confirms in writing that they will accept service, the claim form must be served at that address. This is a strict requirement, and any failure to comply could lead to the claim being struck out. The Court of Appeal reaffirmed this stringent approach in cases such as Nangelenan v Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust and Collier v Williams.
In Keilaus, the court had little sympathy for the claimant’s solicitor, who failed to note the defendant’s solicitor’s written confirmation to accept service. Master Clark stated that solicitors must record or highlight the acceptance of service clearly to avoid such errors.
For ease of reference CPR 6.7 provides:
CPR 6.7 provides an easy summary.
“6.7
(1) Solicitor within the jurisdiction: Subject to rule 6.5(1), where –
(a) the defendant has given in writing the business address within the jurisdiction of a solicitor as an address at which the defendant may be served with the claim form; or
(b) a solicitor acting for the defendant has notified the claimant in writing that the solicitor is instructed by the defendant to accept service of the claim form on behalf of the defendant at a business address within the jurisdiction,
the claim form must be served at the business address of that solicitor.”
Serving at the Nominated Address: The Limited Company Exception
While solicitors must adhere to CPR 6.7, there is an important exception when serving a limited company. Under the Companies Act and Civil Procedure Rules, a limited company can always be served at its registered office, regardless of whether a solicitor has been nominated to accept service. This was clarified in the case of Murphy v Staples.
Lessons from Keilaus: Practical Implications for Legal Practitioners
The Keilaus case highlights mistakes can occur if a file is not clearly marked for service once a nomination has taken place. In this instance, the solicitor failed to act on the written confirmation that the defendant’s solicitor would accept service. As a result, the claim was not validly served, and the court refused to grant relief, causing the claim to be struck out.
Solicitors must ensure they follow clear procedures for confirming and recording when opposing solicitors are authorised to accept service. A simple oversight in such situations can lead to a case being dismissed, as demonstrated by Keilaus. Generally keep a separate folder with service requirements and any nominations by the Defendants should be copied into this folder to ensure it is not overlooked. Check list of important requirements should be in place and even have another advisor take a second checkpoint over the matter before it is finally served as there are other potential errors that could result in catastrophic results.
Conclusion: Ensuring Proper Service is Critical
The failure to correctly serve a claim form can be fatal to a case. The Keilaus decision underscores the importance of confirming service details early, recording them clearly, and following strict rules under CPR 6.7. Legal practitioners should take note of these key rulings to avoid unnecessary litigation failures. Further and importantly do not leave matters to the last minute. Give yourself time!
