Article 75: Service on a party's lawyer

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 12013/2547 (2004)

   Service of a pleading on the lawyer whom a party has appointed to conduct the case is lawful service under Section 75.

   The court explained that service of the pleading on the lawyer appointed to conduct the case was lawful under Section 75, applied through the governing statute, and that serving the answer and counterclaim on the plaintiff's lawyer by registered return mail had the same effect as service by a court officer.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 78/2540 (1997)

   Where a party has appointed more than one lawyer, service of the notice of the appellate judgment on just one of the appointed lawyers, by posting at that lawyer's domicile, is lawful service under Section 75, and the party is treated as knowing the date.

   The plaintiff had two lawyers, and the notice of the appellate judgment was posted at the domicile of one of them. The court held that even though there were two lawyers, service on the one appointed to conduct the case was lawful under Section 75, so the plaintiff was properly deemed to know the date for reading the appellate judgment.

3. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 5058/2538 (1995)

   Although the notice of an appellate judgment may be served on the lawyer a party appointed under Section 75, posting it at the lawyer's work place is not valid where that office had already relocated elsewhere and was found locked and empty.

   The officer took the notice to the work place of the lawyers for defendants 3 and 4, found no one and the office locked, and posted it by court order. The court noted that while service on the appointed lawyer is allowed under Section 75, the office had long since moved, casting doubt on whether the posting there was valid service.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.