The High Court allowed an appeal after the Circuit Court refused to grant judgment in default of appearance in judicial separation proceedings, finding that service of the papers by WeChat had been effective.
Mr Justice Jordan delivered the judgment on 17 February 2025. The dispute on appeal concerned service, not whether a judicial separation should be granted. The High Court returned the case to the Circuit Court for further prosecution of the applicant’s claim.
The parties, identified in the judgment only as J and H, married in 2019 and have one child, born in 2021. The applicant lives in the family home in Dublin. The respondent, a Chinese citizen, lives in China with the child. The judgment says the respondent left Ireland with the child in October 2022 and told the applicant by text that she was going to China.
In July 2023, the applicant sought permission to serve the intended proceedings through WeChat. The County Registrar authorised service by that method. The applicant later swore that he sent the court order and proceedings to the respondent through WeChat, and that she acknowledged receipt. The record included screenshots showing the message and five attached documents. The message mistakenly said she had 10 days to enter an appearance, although the order itself was also served and specified 42 days.
The Circuit Court refused the applicant’s February 2024 request for judgment in default. On 12 July 2024, it said it was dissatisfied that service could be effected by WeChat or email alone under the Circuit Court Rules. The applicant appealed.
The High Court considered the rules and legislation governing substituted service, including the court’s power to approve a method likely to bring proceedings to a person’s attention. It found clear evidence that the respondent knew of the case. She had emailed the applicant’s solicitor and the Circuit Family Law Court before the Circuit Court hearing, explaining that she could not attend at short notice and saying she had applied for a divorce in China. She later appeared remotely at the appeal hearing.
The High Court allowed the appeal and ordered that the documents served to that point be treated as good and sufficient service. It directed that future documents be sent through the same WeChat profile and by email. The respondent was given until 24 January 2025 to file her appearance, defence, counterclaim and affidavits of means and welfare.
At a mention on 5 February 2025, the court was told that the respondent had filed and served the required papers. The case was returned to the Circuit Court. The High Court made no order as to costs. It did not determine the underlying judicial separation claim.