Ferrarini S.p.A. v Magnol Shipping Company Inc. (Sky One)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE KERR |
| Judgment Date | 30 July 1987 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1987] EWCA Civ J0730-10 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Docket Number | 87/0832 |
| Date | 30 July 1987 |
[1987] EWCA Civ J0730-10
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
COMMERCIAL COURT
(MR. JUSTICE STAUGHTON)
Royal Courts of Justice
Lord Justice Kerr
87/0832
MR. G. KEALEY (instructed by Messrs. Middleton, Potts & Co.,Solicitors, London EC2R 8DB) appeared on behalf of the Defendants (Applicants).
MR. J. HIRST (instructed by Messrs. Clyde & Co., Solicitors,Guildford, Surrey, GU1 4HA) appeared on behalf of the Plaintiffs (Respondents).
This is an application by the defendants for leave to appeal. Not only have I no hesitation in refusing it out of hand, but I would go further and say that the exercise of discretion by Mr. Justice Staughton in extending the validity of this writ was plainly right.
I hope his judgment will be reported, because it deals with interesting matters.
I should add that the test which the judge applied in saying that the circumstances justifying the extension of the validity of the writ had to be exceptional has since been modified by the House of Lords, with the result that the test is now merely that there must be "good cause", or words to that effect, for exercising that discretion. If Mr. Justice Staughton had been aware that that was going to be the new test applied by the House of Lords, then of course his decision to extend the writ' would have been a fortiori.
In my view there is no merit whatever in this application for leave to appeal, and I refuse it.
( Order: Application dismissed with costs).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Velox Intl Invc v Peirano
... ... Case cited: (1) Ferrarini S.p.A. v. Magnol Shipping Co. Inc. (The Sky One), ... or was a director, officer or member of a company registered within the jurisdiction … which is ... ...
-
Olafsson v Gissurarson
...of the laws of the state in which service was effected (e.g. F errarini S.P.A. and others v Magnol Shipping Co Inc(the "Sky One") 1988 1 Lloyds Rep 238). The case I am considering, he argues, is merely an example of the incomplete execution of the permitted method of service, which succeede......
-
BAS Capital Funding Corporation and Others v Medfinco Ltd and Others
...in the country where the claim form is to be served which is against the law of that country: CPR 6.24(2). 157 In The Sky One [1988] 1 Lloyd's Rep 238, Hobhouse J held that the RSC equivalent of CPR 6.24 (0. 11, r.6(3)) did not provide exclusive methods of service, and that service might be......
- Malayan Banking Berhad v Ng Man Heng
-
CURING NON-COMPLIANCE WITH FOREIGN LAWS IN THE CONTEXT OF SERVICE OUT OF JURISDICTION
...rules are found in O 65 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed). 42 See Ferrarini SpA v Magnol Shipping Co (The “Sky One”)[1988] 1 Lloyd's Rep 238 at 240, where in relation to O 11 r 6(3) of the UK Rules of the Supreme Court (SI 1965 No 1776), Staughton J stated that: It is common......