Learning Outcomes
After studying this article, you will be able to explain when and how a court may permit service of a claim form or other documents by alternative methods under the Civil Procedure Rules. You will understand the requirements for an application under CPR 6.15, the court’s approach to discretion, and the practical steps for ensuring effective service where standard methods are not possible. You will also be able to identify common pitfalls and apply these principles to SQE1-style scenarios.
SQE1 Syllabus
For SQE1, you are required to understand the rules and practicalities of commencing a claim, including service by alternative methods. As you revise, focus on:
- The circumstances in which the court may authorise service by alternative methods or at alternative places under CPR 6.15.
- The requirements for making an application for alternative service and the evidence needed.
- The court’s discretion and the factors considered when granting alternative service.
- The use of electronic means (such as email or social media) for service.
- The interaction between domestic rules and international service requirements.
Test Your Knowledge
Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.
- Under what rule can the court authorise service of a claim form by a method not otherwise permitted by the Civil Procedure Rules?
- What must a claimant show to persuade the court to allow service by an alternative method?
- True or false? Service by email is always valid if the claimant knows the defendant’s email address.
- Which of the following is NOT a factor the court will consider when deciding whether to permit alternative service?
a) The likelihood the defendant will be notified of proceedings
b) The claimant’s attempts at standard service
c) The defendant’s willingness to settle
d) The interests of justice
Introduction
When commencing a civil claim, the claimant must serve the claim form and other documents on the defendant using methods set out in the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). However, there are situations where standard service is not possible—perhaps the defendant cannot be found, is evading service, or is outside the jurisdiction. In these cases, the court may authorise service by an alternative method or at an alternative place under CPR 6.15. This article explains the requirements, procedure, and practical considerations for service by alternative methods, as well as the court’s approach to discretion and common examples relevant for SQE1.
Service by Alternative Methods: Legal Basis
The main rule governing alternative service is CPR 6.15. This allows the court to authorise service by a method or at a place not otherwise permitted by Part 6, if there is “good reason” to do so.
Key Term: alternative service
Service of a claim form or other document by a method or at a place not expressly permitted by the standard rules, as authorised by the court under CPR 6.15.Key Term: CPR 6.15
The Civil Procedure Rule that empowers the court to permit alternative service where there is good reason, including by electronic means or at an alternative address.
When Can Alternative Service Be Used?
The court will only authorise alternative service if standard methods (such as personal service, first-class post, or delivery to a permitted address) are impracticable or have failed. The claimant must show that all reasonable steps to effect standard service have been taken, and that the proposed alternative method is likely to bring the proceedings to the defendant’s attention.
Key Term: good reason
A justification required by the court to permit alternative service, usually involving evidence that standard service is impossible or ineffective, and that the alternative method is likely to notify the defendant.
Court’s Discretion and Key Factors
The decision to allow alternative service is discretionary. The court will consider:
- The claimant’s attempts to serve by standard methods.
- Evidence of evasion or inability to locate the defendant.
- Whether the alternative method is likely to bring the proceedings to the defendant’s attention.
- The interests of justice and fairness to both parties.
The court will not grant alternative service merely for convenience or to save time or cost.
Worked Example 1.1
A claimant has tried to serve a claim form at the defendant’s last known address, but the defendant has moved and cannot be traced. The claimant knows the defendant is active on a particular social media account. Can the court authorise service via social media?
Answer: Yes, if the claimant provides evidence that standard service has failed and that the defendant is likely to see the documents via the social media account, the court may authorise service by that method under CPR 6.15.
Practical Steps and Evidence Required
To apply for alternative service, the claimant must file an application notice (usually Form N244) with supporting evidence. The evidence should include:
- Details of all attempts at standard service.
- Any evidence of the defendant’s current whereabouts or contact details.
- Why the proposed alternative method is likely to notify the defendant.
The application should specify the exact method proposed (e.g., email, WhatsApp, social media, service on a relative, or posting at a workplace).
Worked Example 1.2
A claimant has an email address for the defendant, which has been used for recent correspondence. Attempts at personal and postal service have failed. What should the claimant do?
Answer: The claimant should apply to the court for permission to serve by email, providing evidence of failed standard service and that the defendant regularly uses the email address. If granted, service by email will be valid.
Electronic Service and Modern Methods
Courts increasingly permit service by electronic means where appropriate. Examples include:
- Email (if the defendant has used the address recently and is likely to read it).
- Social media (if the account is active and controlled by the defendant).
- Messaging apps (such as WhatsApp or SMS, if evidence shows the defendant uses them).
However, service by email or electronic means is not valid unless the court has authorised it or the defendant has expressly agreed to accept service by that method.
Key Term: electronic service
Service of documents by electronic means (e.g., email, social media, messaging apps), permitted only if expressly authorised by the court or agreed by the defendant.
Retrospective Validation of Service
The court may retrospectively validate service already carried out by an alternative method if it is satisfied that the defendant was likely to be notified and that there was good reason for using that method (CPR 6.15(2)). This is useful if a claimant has served documents in good faith by a non-standard method before seeking the court’s permission.
Worked Example 1.3
A claimant, unable to locate the defendant, sends the claim form by email and later applies for retrospective validation. The defendant responds to the email. Will the court validate service?
Answer: If the court is satisfied that the email brought the proceedings to the defendant’s attention and that standard service was not possible, it is likely to validate service under CPR 6.15(2).
International Service and Alternative Methods
Where the defendant is outside England and Wales, service must comply with international rules (such as the Hague Service Convention) and local law. The court may authorise alternative service abroad only if standard methods are unavailable or have failed, and if the foreign country’s law allows it.
Key Term: Hague Service Convention
An international treaty setting out procedures for serving documents abroad in civil and commercial matters between signatory countries.
Exam Warning
The court will not authorise alternative service in a foreign country if it would breach that country’s law or international agreements. Always check the requirements for service in the relevant jurisdiction.
Common Pitfalls and Practical Considerations
- Do not assume service by email or social media is valid unless expressly authorised.
- Always keep detailed records of all attempts at standard service.
- The proposed alternative method must be likely to notify the defendant—not just theoretically possible.
- If the defendant is deliberately evading service, provide evidence (e.g., returned mail, witness statements).
Revision Tip
When revising, focus on the requirements for evidence and the court’s discretionary factors. Practice applying these to short scenarios.
Key Point Checklist
This article has covered the following key knowledge points:
- The court may authorise service by alternative methods under CPR 6.15 if there is good reason.
- The claimant must show failed attempts at standard service and that the alternative method is likely to notify the defendant.
- Applications require detailed evidence and a clear proposal for the alternative method.
- Electronic service is only valid if authorised by the court or agreed by the defendant.
- Retrospective validation is possible if the defendant was likely notified and standard service was impracticable.
- International service must comply with local law and treaties; alternative service abroad is only permitted in limited circumstances.
Key Terms and Concepts
- alternative service
- CPR 6.15
- good reason
- electronic service
- Hague Service Convention
