By: Save The Date: HCCH a|Bridged | Letters Blogatory

Save The Date: HCCH a|Bridged | Letters Blogatory — Mon, 23 Sep 2019 12:09:49 +0000

[…] Barriers in the Convention to Service By Electronic Means. In the United States, most litigants who want to use electronic methods of service want to avoid having to go through the foreign central authority. So let’s assume that the litigant just emails the document to the foreign defendant, and let’s ignore for the moment the problems of territoriality outlined above. Although there are too many American decisions approving this method of service in cases where the Convention applies, these decisions are clearly wrong, at least in the many states that have objected to service by postal channels. Everyone agrees that the Convention is exclusive, which means you need to find an article of the Convention that authorizes or at least permits the method of service you use. If the foreign state has objected to service under Article 10(a), I challenge anyone to find another article of the Convention that permits service by email. There isn’t one. The situation is a little more complicated in states that have not objected to service under Article 10(a), because then one can argue that service by email is service via the postal channel. That is dubious: […]

Comments on: Email and the Hague Service Convention Revisited

By: Save The Date: HCCH a|Bridged | Letters Blogatory