A while ago, I wrote about Flo Rida being served a lawsuit by way of his Facebook Page. Well, it appears as if Australia has reversed course and found that service by Facebook is not appropriate. This matter all started when Flo Rida agreed to appear at a music festival, but then failed to show up or return the fee he received to perform at the music festival. As stated in my earlier post, an Australian court found service of a lawsuit by Facebook upon Flo Rida appropriate. However, recently an Australian appellate court found that service by way of Facebook was not proper, and therefore, the Australian courts did not have jurisdiction over Flo Rida.
In the United States, plaintiffs must serve most Summons and Complaints (lawsuit initiating documents) personally (i.e. have the defendant served in person). There are some limited exceptions, but the idea is to ensure that the defendant is properly given notice of the lawsuit and to avoid "junk" service in an effort to obtain a default judgment.
In ruling that service was not proper in this case, the Australian appellate court noted that a person's Facebook account is not reliable (i.e. calculated to provide the defendant actual notice). For example, there is no way to guarantee that the person served via Facebook is the actual defendant (maybe it is a fan page or someone with the same name).
In the United States, a New York Federal Court allowed service via Facebook just this last March. Apparently, that judge was sufficiently convinced that the Facebook account belonged to the defendant in that case.
The moral of the story? Beware when checking your Facebook account, you may find more than your friend's status updates . . . you may find yourself haled into court.
No comments:
Post a Comment