1. Key takeaways
The court may separate proceedings against multiple
defendants on its own initiative to ensure procedural efficiency,
especially when service is delayed on some defendants (Rule 303.2
RoP)
When service was completed for two defendants but not for two
others, the court found it unreasonable to delay the action and
ordered a separation to avoid stalling proceedings. The court
ordered the separation before the first statement of defence was
due to facilitate the proceedings and decided not to charge
additional fees for the new action.
The separated action is deemed pending from the original
filing date, and the statement of claim is deemed served on the
original service date
