Infantino v MacLean

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtQueen's Bench Division
Judgment Date14 June 2001
Date14 June 2001

Queen's Bench Division

Before Mr Justice Douglas Brown.

Infantino
and
Maclean

Practice - time for service of claim form having elapsed - court could in unusual circumstances dispense with service

Court can dispense with service

Where the time for service of a claim form had elapsed and an extension order could not be granted under rule 7.6 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court could in appropriate circumstances make an order dispensing with service under rule 6.9.

Mr Justice Douglas Brown so held in the Queen's Bench Division when allowing the defendant's appeal against the decision by District Judge Horan at Stockport County Court on February 14, 2001 extending time for the claimant, Constantina Infantino, for service of a claim form and particulars of claim to the date when it was received by the defendant consultant gynaecological oncologist, Professor Allan Maclean, in respect of an action arising from his alleged negligent treatment of her cancerous tumour.

Mr Jonathan Glasson for Mrs Infantino; Mr John Whitting for the defendant.

MR JUSTICE DOUGLAS BROWN said that due to administrative error the claim form and particulars of claim were sent to the wrong document exchange address, and as a result the date of deemed service was a day later than required by rule 7.5.

Without prejudice to his contention that the claim should be struck out, the defendant served his defence in which he admitted breach of duty of care but not causation.

The claimant could not be said to have taken all reasonable steps to serve the form and so could not satisfy the requirements of rule 7.6 which permitted an order for extending time for service.

Where those requirements were not met, a party could not seek relief by virtue of rule 3.9 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which provided that the court could consider applications for relief from sanctions imposed for failure to comply with...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Godwin v Swindon Borough Council
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 10 October 2001
    ...increase the extent of litigation. 15 Since the oral hearing, two recent additional authorities have come to the court's attention. Infantino v. MacLean (Douglas Brown J, 14 th June 2001) was reported in The Times of 21 st July 2001; and Anderton v. Clwyd County Council (McCombe J, 25 th Ju......
  • Anderton v Clwyd County Council (No 2)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • Invalid date
  • DC v B MBC sub nom C v B MBC
    • United Kingdom
    • Family Division
    • 18 July 2002
    ...court - care plans - Human Rights Act 1998 Section 6 and 7 - ECHR Article 8 - R (P) v Sec of State for Home Dept; R (Q) v Same (Times Law Reports 20 July 2001; [2001] 3 FCR 416 -In Re M (Care: Challenging Decisions by Local Authority) [2001] 2 SLR 1300 Family Division judge is most appropri......
  • Anderton v Clwyd County Council; Bryant v Pech and Another; Dorgan v Home Office; Chambers v Southern Domestic Electrical Services Ltd; Cummins v Shell International Manning Services Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 3 July 2002
    ...it has become unnecessary to serve it in order to bring it to the attention of the defendant. 52 The decision of Douglas Brown J in Infantino v. McClean [2001] 3 All ER 802 was cited by the claimants for the proposition that rule 6.9 gave the court power to dispense with service of a claim ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • The Review Roles of the Court of Appeal: Grobelaar v News International
    • United Kingdom
    • The Modern Law Review Nbr. 64-6, November 2001
    • 1 November 2001
    ...1 Burr 383.22 [1906] AC 148 HL (3–2), 161 per Lord Loreburn LC.23 [1986] AC 860 PC; see also RvTantram (and other joined cases), The Times 20 July 2001, CA andIgwemma vChief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, The Times 20 July 2001 CA.24 [1922] 2 KB 111, 121.25 (1785) 1 TR 11.26 [1962]......
  • American Tobacco Litigation: Lessons for European Product Liability
    • Ireland
    • Trinity College Law Review Nbr. V-2002, January 2002
    • 1 January 2002
    ...of torts liability in society may affect future tobacco litigation. "US lawyer meets Minister about suing US tobacco firms" The Irish Times, 20 July 2001. In 1997, the English Law Commission published a Consultation Paper proposing that the National Health Service be given the right to reco......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT