- Followed — Alexander Gorbachev v Andrey Grigoryevich Guriev 2022-09-30
“…’. But following the globalisation (and digitalisation) of the world economy that attitude can now be seen as out of date. In Abela v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44, [2013] 1 WLR 2043, for example, Lord Sumption (with whom the other justices agreed on this point) said at [53]:…”
- Cited — The Good Law Project (R on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care 2022-03-24
“…les have been well-travelled in the authorities, with the decision in Barton, endorsing the earlier Supreme Court decision in Abela v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44; [2013] 1 WLR 2043, at the helm. What constitutes “good reason” is essentially a matter of factual evaluation; over-analysis and copious citation of authority will not assist (se…”
- Cited — Ideal Shopping Direct Limited & Ors. v Mastercard Incorporated & Ors. 2022-01-13
“…there was “good reason” for the court to exercise the power conferred by the rule. The judge referred to the decisions of the Supreme Court in Abela v Baadarani[2013] 1 WLR 2043 and Barton v Wright Hassall LLP [2018] 1 WLR 1119. In the latter case, Lord Sumption summarised the general approach the court should adopt at [10] of his judg…”
- Cited — Sutton v Norwich City Council 2021-01-13
“…Appeal might or would have adopted, but has exceeded the generous ambit within which reasonable disagreement is possible”. In Abela v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44, [2013] 1 WLR 2043, Lord Clarke spoke at paragraph 23 of an appellate Court interfering with a value judgment based on the evaluation of a number of different factors only “if sa…”
- Cited — Woodward & Anor v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd 2019-06-12
“…siness [2017] EWHC 2190 (Ch)); (2) the fact that the proper approach to CPR r 6.15 requires the court to discourage “technical game playing”: Abela v Baadarani [2013] 1 WLR 2043; (3) a litigant’s duty to avoid unnecessary, expensive and time-consuming satellite litigation: Denton v T H White Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 906; and (4) the rejecti…”
- Cited — Huawei Technologies Co, Ltd v Conversant Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. 2019-01-30
“…pragmatic approach to the question of service out, relying on the observations of Lord Sumption JSC in Abela and others v Baadarani and another [2013] UKSC 44; [2013] 1 WLR 2043 at [53].…”
- Cited — Vik v Deutsche Bank AG 2018-09-06
“…oper bounds – especially where individual liberty is at risk – even having regard to the observations of Lord Sumption JSC in Abela v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44; [2013] 1 WLR 2043, esp. at [53]. That said, I see no sign of any “exorbitant” jurisdiction being exercised in this case, keeping well in mind the indisputable jurisdiction over …”
- Cited — Eurasia Sports Ltd v Aguad 2018-07-24
“…udgment and again referred to in paragraph 48 should now be read in the context of Lord Sumption’s comment in paragraph 53 of Abela v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44; [2013] 1 WLR 2043 to the effect that litigation between residents of different states is a routine incident of modern commercial life and any decision in relation to service out…”
- Followed — Orexim Trading Ltd v Mahavir Port And Terminal Private Ltd & Ano 2018-07-13
“…”. But following the globalisation (and digitalisation) of the world economy that attitude can now be seen as out of date. In Abela v Bardarini [2013] UKSC 44, [2013] 1 WLR 2043, for example, Lord Sumption (with whom the other justices agreed on this point) said at [53]…”
- Considered — Thum v Thum 2018-07-12
“…ons to be implied into procedural rules. The submissions in this case have not extended beyond a reference to the Supreme Court’s decision in Abela v Baadarani [2013] 1 WLR 2043. In that case Lord Clarke considered it to have been rightly conceded that a power prospectively to permit alternative service abroad was to be implied into th…”
- Cited — Société Générale v Goldas Kuyumculuk Sanayi Ithalat Ihracat A.S. & Ors 2018-05-15
“…quirement that the good reason should impact on the expiry of the limitation period was appropriate for CPR 7.6 but not for CPR 6.15, that in Abela v Baadarani [2013] 1 WLR 2043 the good reason for ordering alternative service did not in fact impact on the expiry of the limitation period and that it should, therefore, be irrelevant whe…”