In November 2017, the author witnessed a Family Court in Nottingham allow a Litigant in Person (LiP) to serve legal notice to his partner (the absent respondent) through the medium of Facebook Messenger. The issues were emotive: The applicant urgently sought disclosure for the whereabouts of their infant children, with whom she had absconded from their home. Evidence presented in Court showed the respondent had a history of substance abuse and mental illness. Consequently, she and their children may have been at risk of physical harm.
While the applicant did not know her physical location, he was able to demonstrate a history of regular, ongoing communication between them via social media. After deliberation, the Judge, at his own instigation, allowed the plaintiff to serve notice, instructing disclosure via Facebook Messenger. He stated his confidence that the respondent would receive and understand the notice and emphasised that the expediency of this method would enable the Court to “move quickly” to next steps, in the event of non-compliance by the respondent.
This report seeks to assess the prevalence of the use of Social Media in Civil Procedure in the UK; its origins, legality and future integration.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- Background
- Abstract
- The Civil Procedure Rules
- Legality
- Landmarks
- Progress
- The Family
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This report aims to evaluate the use of social media in UK civil procedure, exploring its origins, legality, and potential for future integration. It examines existing legal frameworks and case law to determine the extent to which social media can be utilized for serving legal notices.
- The use of social media for legal service in the UK.
- The legality and precedents surrounding social media service of legal documents.
- Analysis of relevant Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) and case law.
- Comparison of approaches across different court systems (UK, Australia, USA, etc.).
- The challenges and risks associated with using social media for legal service.
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
Background: This section introduces a specific case in Nottingham Family Court where Facebook Messenger was used to serve legal notice, highlighting the urgency and emotional context of the situation. It sets the stage for the report by emphasizing the need to assess the prevalence, legality, and future of social media use in civil procedure in the UK.
Abstract: This section defines social media and provides a brief overview of the report's focus on its use within civil procedure, referencing the origins of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) and their goal of modernizing the justice system.
The Civil Procedure Rules: This section delves into the history of the CPR, tracing their development from Lord Woolf's reports aiming for a faster, fairer, and more understandable justice system. It highlights the CPR's overriding objective of enabling the court to deal with cases justly and the subsequent acts extending reforms to family and criminal courts. Importantly, it notes the failure of these rules committees to explicitly address the use of social media, despite its emergence.
Legality: This section contrasts the clear rules surrounding social media use in criminal proceedings, where strict guidelines and prescribed methods for service are laid out, with the ambiguity surrounding its use in civil cases. It emphasizes the absence of explicit mention of social media in the CPR, particularly within sections governing service of documents, and highlights the potential for using alternative service methods under specific circumstances and with court approval.
Landmarks: This section examines key case law related to social media and legal service, starting with *Entores v Miles*, which addressed instantaneous communication. It discusses cases such as *Blaney v Persons Unknown*, where Twitter was used for service of an injunction, and *AKO Capital*, which established the precedent for using Facebook Messenger. The section also notes the differing approaches taken by courts in Australia and the USA.
Progress: This section traces the global progress of using social media for substituted service, citing examples from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Ireland, and South Africa. It contrasts this with the initially more cautious approach in the USA and notes the establishment of this practice in the UK, along with concerns about user verification and security raised in cases like *The Bussey Law Firm PC*. It further highlights that despite the potential, the practice remains limited within the civil courts.
The Family: This section discusses a Family Court case, *RE T (a child)*, where Facebook was used to locate a birth parent for adoption purposes. It emphasizes the judge's view that, while not the first method to be used, Facebook is a useful tool in locating individuals, but also the mandatory requirement for courts to ensure adequate service to both natural parents.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
Social media, legal service, Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), substituted service, case law, alternative service, Facebook, Twitter, instantaneous communication, online service of documents, legal precedent, UK courts, family court, jurisprudence.
Frequently asked questions
What is the purpose of this document?
This document provides a comprehensive language preview of a report analyzing the use of social media in UK civil procedure. It includes a table of contents, objectives and key themes, chapter summaries, and keywords.
What are the key themes explored in the report?
The report focuses on the use of social media for legal service in the UK, examining its legality, precedents, relevant Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) and case law. It also compares approaches across different court systems and addresses the challenges and risks associated with using social media for legal service.
What does the "Background" section cover?
The "Background" section introduces a specific case in Nottingham Family Court where Facebook Messenger was used to serve legal notice, highlighting the urgency and the need to assess the prevalence and legality of social media use in civil procedure in the UK.
What is the focus of the "The Civil Procedure Rules" section?
This section delves into the history of the CPR, tracing their development from Lord Woolf's reports, aiming for a faster, fairer, and more understandable justice system. It also highlights the failure of the rules committees to explicitly address the use of social media, despite its emergence.
What is discussed in the "Legality" section?
The "Legality" section contrasts the clear rules surrounding social media use in criminal proceedings with the ambiguity surrounding its use in civil cases. It emphasizes the absence of explicit mention of social media in the CPR and highlights the potential for using alternative service methods with court approval.
What is covered in the "Landmarks" section?
This section examines key case law related to social media and legal service, including *Entores v Miles*, *Blaney v Persons Unknown*, and *AKO Capital*, showcasing precedents for using platforms like Twitter and Facebook Messenger for serving legal notices.
What progress is noted in the "Progress" section?
The "Progress" section traces the global progress of using social media for substituted service, citing examples from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Ireland, and South Africa, contrasting it with the initially more cautious approach in the USA. It highlights that despite the potential, the practice remains limited within civil courts in the UK.
What is discussed in the "The Family" section?
The "The Family" section discusses a Family Court case, *RE T (a child)*, where Facebook was used to locate a birth parent for adoption purposes. While Facebook is a useful tool, adequate service to both natural parents must be ensured.
What are the main keywords associated with this report?
The main keywords include social media, legal service, Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), substituted service, case law, alternative service, Facebook, Twitter, instantaneous communication, online service of documents, legal precedent, UK courts, family court, and jurisprudence.
- Citation du texte
- Guy Tinsley (Auteur), 2021, Legal Service via Social Media. What could possibly go wrong?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1561368
