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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll