header-logo header-logo

29 November 2013
Issue: 7586 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Divorce service abroad

If service of a divorce petition on the respondent abroad is bad...

If service of a divorce petition on the respondent abroad is bad because the exacting requirements of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR) have not been complied with but the respondent takes no point and acknowledges service, should the court take any point?

The requirements for service of a petition out of the jurisdiction are generally laid down by the relevant Regulation or Convention (which are therefore reflected in the FPR) or, where none applies, the law of the country in which the petition is to be served: FPR r 6.43(3). In the case of service under Council Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007, the effect of Art 19 of the Regulation is that where the respondent has appeared, it is not necessary to establish that service has been effected in accordance with the Regulation; a similar position applies to service under the 1965 Hague Convention on Service, by virtue of Art 15 of the Convention.

Accordingly, unless the acknowledgement itself raises an issue about the validity of service, it is not necessary for the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll