and the site receives a small commission
Domicilium citandi et executandi
- Thread starter Sangoma
- Start date
- Messages
- 23,527
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
A mail service with signature as proof of receipt. Otherwise anyone can deny having received mail and there is no evidence to the contrary.
Might be good to confirm the meaning of your presumably latin phrase for us.
OP
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Basically it means the address you agree to use to receive correspondence, and it is your duty to inform of any change, and then anything sent to that address as per the method you mention, or any other method (ie messenger of the court) that can be accepted/proven to have been done, you are deemed to have received, and then any actions that require your reply can continue, as you have effectively elected not to reply.
Hope that make sense
- Messages
- 23,527
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
I am not aware of this being a normal part of UK proceedings. Basically, if you can't prove something was put into the hand of either an individual or their legal representative than then they never got it.
OP
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks, pity, as it means people can just ignore letters and messages and drag out the inevitable, wasting every ones time.
My interest is not a major issue, just annoying, but I imagine it could be a big problem though.
Sadly, we are going through this ATM, with the other person ignoring solicitor's letters.
- Messages
- 4,350
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Government departments generally require you to tell them on change of address, so a notice of intended prosecution for speeding doesn't fail because you didn't update the V5C when you moved.Basically it means the address you agree to use to receive correspondence, and it is your duty to inform of any change, and then anything sent to that address as per the method you mention, or any other method (ie messenger of the court) that can be accepted/proven to have been done, you are deemed to have received, and then any actions that require your reply can continue, as you have effectively elected not to reply.
Hope that make sense
Further, per the Interpretation Act 1978 section 7, anything posted is deemed received in "the normal course of post" and the burden of proof is on the addressee that they did not receive it, not on the sender. This only applies to documents that an act of parliament states can or must be sent by post.
- Messages
- 15,729
- Edit My Images
- No
A very interesting thread....
The bit about the burden of proof falling on the addressee is akin to asking someone to prove a negative.................how on earth can one prove one did not receive a letter
Afteral, for most normal folks who want to ensure that the addressee has indeed received a letter is to at the minimum send it 1st Class "Signed For" and there lays a proven 'end to end' trail (not withstanding that the addressee may not be the one who has signed for it, though can that in part be mitigated by marking the outside "Private & Confidential to be opened by addressee only .
Last edited:
- Messages
- 10,392
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This situation occured to me. Is it relevent to this topic ?
abcnews.go.com
"Process servers have shown up at his residence, and they have refused to take the summons and refused to let the process servers in to serve," said David Boies, chairman of New York City-based law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, which represents Giuffre. "He has stopped coming out in public. He has been moving around."
"There's no dispute that the legal team has it. We've sent it to them a dozen ways," Boies said Friday. "But [the Prince's lawyers] are taking the position that giving it to [his] legal team is not effective service. We think it is."
The determination of whether the Prince has officially been served will ultimately fall to a U.S. federal judge overseeing the lawsuit. The first hearing in the case is scheduled for Monday. To date, no lawyer for the prince has appeared on the public record of the case.
Regarding service of the summons: "These have included attempted personal service of our client at his home, the instruction of a private process server, and attempts to email the proceedings not only to this firm, but to barristers (who are not authorised to conduct litigation) who are known to have acted for the Duke," he continued. "This is regrettable."
I recall reading that security personnel..eg police on the gate.. at Prince Andrew's residences ,wherever.. were told not to receive any documents being handed to them .
Prince Andrew avoiding service of lawsuit, accuser's lawyer says
Prince Andrew and his attorneys have allegedly refused multiple attempts to serve the beleaguered royal with notice of a sexual assault lawsuit filed against him.
"Process servers have shown up at his residence, and they have refused to take the summons and refused to let the process servers in to serve," said David Boies, chairman of New York City-based law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, which represents Giuffre. "He has stopped coming out in public. He has been moving around."
"There's no dispute that the legal team has it. We've sent it to them a dozen ways," Boies said Friday. "But [the Prince's lawyers] are taking the position that giving it to [his] legal team is not effective service. We think it is."
The determination of whether the Prince has officially been served will ultimately fall to a U.S. federal judge overseeing the lawsuit. The first hearing in the case is scheduled for Monday. To date, no lawyer for the prince has appeared on the public record of the case.
Regarding service of the summons: "These have included attempted personal service of our client at his home, the instruction of a private process server, and attempts to email the proceedings not only to this firm, but to barristers (who are not authorised to conduct litigation) who are known to have acted for the Duke," he continued. "This is regrettable."
I recall reading that security personnel..eg police on the gate.. at Prince Andrew's residences ,wherever.. were told not to receive any documents being handed to them .