Report comment

As it stands I agree with Andrew to an extent as communication is so easy. On many occasions I’ve told parties no service by email but they do it anyway. Most of the time an argument is non-progressive so I let it slide.

But the rules are the rules and should apply equally to everyone. That it is complex is why folks pay someone to represent them. If someone doesn’t want to pay then at all stages they have to do a cost/risk/reward assessment and then live with the consequences.

The court cannot imply rules that simply are not there and nterpretation only goes so far. If a solicitor had served it’d be tough. Perhaps change the rule to say serve by email (and the parties must provide an email address for that purpose) unless expressly notified otherwise. And I don’t mean by standard phrases on a firm’s website.

Then you’d have to deal with those that still don’t use email or appreciate that attachments mean the emails get captured by spam.

If I were BLM/Wright Hasssall I’d be sticking to my guns.