A recent High Court decision serves as a stark reminder that serving court proceedings is not simply an administrative step. Even in high value, long running disputes, failing to comply with the rules on service can have serious consequences, potentially bringing a claim to an end before it is ever heard.

 

When procedure becomes critical

 

In Coal Pension Properties Ltd v Mace Living Ltd & Others [2026] EWHC 1248 (TCC), the court considered whether a Claim Form worth more than £100 million had been validly served.

 

The dispute related to a construction project completed in 2011. Although court proceedings had been issued several years earlier, the parties agreed a number of extensions of time for service, with a final deadline of 2 February 2026.

 

On the last day for service, the claimant’s solicitors emailed the Claim Form and Particulars of Claim to the defendant’s solicitors. However, the defendant argued that its solicitors had never agreed to accept service by email and had not been authorised to accept service on behalf of their clients. The court agreed.

 

What the court said

 

The Technology and Construction Court reaffirmed that the rules governing service of a Claim Form are strict and must be followed precisely.

 

Under the Civil Procedure Rules, a solicitor can only accept service on behalf of a client if they have expressly confirmed in writing that they are authorised to do so. Likewise, service by email is only valid where specific procedural requirements have been satisfied. The claimant argued that previous correspondence and court documents showed that the defendant’s solicitors were authorised to accept service. The court rejected those arguments, finding that nothing provided the clear and express confirmation required by the rules.

 

Importantly, the court emphasised that experienced solicitors should understand the need for certainty when dealing with service of proceedings.

 

Knowledge is not enough

 

One of the claimant’s key arguments was that the defendant clearly knew about the claim because the documents had been received. The court confirmed that this alone is not sufficient. The purpose of the service rules is to provide certainty and clarity. Simply bringing proceedings to a party’s attention does not cure defects in service where the formal requirements have not been met.

 

Can the court rescue defective service?

 

The claimant also asked the court to retrospectively validate the service under CPR 6.15, which allows alternative methods of service in certain circumstances. The court refused.

 

In deciding whether to grant relief, the court considered:

 

• Whether the claimant had taken reasonable steps to comply with the rules.

• Whether the defendant was aware of the contents of the Claim Form.

• Whether the defendant would suffer prejudice if the application was granted.

 

Although the defendant was aware of the claim, the court found that the claimant had failed to take the simple step of checking whether the defendant’s solicitors were authorised to accept service. The judge noted that many of the claimant’s difficulties arose because service had been left until the very last moment.

 

The court also recognised that granting the application would deprive the defendant of a valuable limitation defence that had accrued by the time the issue was considered. As a result, the application was dismissed and the claim was not allowed to proceed.

 

Why this matters

 

The decision highlights an important distinction between general correspondence during litigation and formal service of proceedings. Parties may exchange emails, negotiate extensions, and communicate regularly for months or even years. However, none of this removes the need to comply strictly with the rules governing service.

 

The courts continue to view service of a Claim Form as a fundamental procedural step requiring certainty, clarity, and formal compliance.

 

Practical lessons for businesses and litigants

 

This case provides several important reminders:

 

• Always obtain clear written confirmation that a solicitor is authorised to accept service on behalf of a client.

• Never assume that ongoing correspondence or previous dealings amount to authority to accept service.

• If serving documents by email, ensure all requirements of the Civil Procedure Rules and Practice Direction 6A have been met.

• Avoid leaving service until the final day, as even a small procedural error can have significant consequences.

 

How we can help

 

Our dispute resolution team advises businesses, property owners, and individuals on all aspects of litigation procedure, including service of proceedings and jurisdictional challenges.

 

We can help you:

 

• Ensure court proceedings are served correctly and within the relevant deadlines.

• Advise on disputes relating to defective service and jurisdiction.

• Respond to claims where service is disputed.

• Protect your position where limitation periods may be affected.

 

Early advice can often prevent costly procedural mistakes and help preserve valuable legal rights.

 

Contact us

 

If you require advice on commencing court proceedings, responding to a claim, or resolving a dispute concerning service of documents, contact our litigation team for expert guidance.