Defence incomplete

[Cpt Morgan]

Hi,

If a defence is served but is incomplete, does this constitute failure to serve?

The reason I ask is that a company liquidation has filed a defence but not included a signed statement of truth. Now I know a company in liquidation may not be able to be prosecuted, however as there its a dispute over who my contract was with, the directors of 3 businesses involved are all one and the same. They have filed the same defence for the other 2 business names and signed on behalf of those 2 but didn't provide a signed statement of truth for the company in liquidation, yet very recently have signed for post (recorded delivery) from that same company, so I am struggling to see the difference. Either they are or they aren't signatories for this business (in liquidation). They have also recently signed a different legal document using the same companies name, so again it seems they are signing when they feel like it, and failing to sign when they don't. Surely they can't have it both ways?

[PallasAthena]

I don't know the answer to your main question but just to comment on Royal Mail signed for deliveries. RM don't undertake to deliver letters to the person/company a letter is addressed to, only to the address itself. So anyone present at the premises can sign to acknowledge the letter has been recieved at that address. They are not signing on behalf of the company/person the letter is addressed to.

So that's the difference between signing for post received and signing a statement of truth. The latter is signing on behalf of the company, the former is not.

[MIKE770]

signed by persons at address is deemed served to company or individual addressed to!

[PallasAthena]

It is MIKE770 but the person signing is still only confirming receipt at the premises, not signing as agent of the company.

It's also deemd served if it isn't sent 'signed for' and is just sent by ordinary post and the postie pushes it through the letterbox. Or indeed if it gets lost by RM en route and the postie never puts it through the letter box at all!

But that's a specific rule [s7 Interpretation Act 1978] applying to service of documents when required by statute law.