Is it impractical for a defendant to be served on a copy of a writ in person?

In Osburn v. Khoo, [1996] B.C.J. No. 2702 (S.C.), Hall J., as he then was, dealt with an order that had been made allowing the posting of copies of a writ on the door of premises as well as serving copies of the documents on the nephew of the defendant. Hall J. concluded as follows: As I analyze matters, if a defendant is to be called upon to attorn to the jurisdiction of the forum courts, it is desirable that if possible there should be personal service of process upon a defendant. I believe that the scheme of our Rules of Court recognizes this general principle. Having regard to the nature of modern communications, I do not consider that it could be argued with much force that service personally on this defendant, who is now apparently resident in Hong Kong, could be said to be impractical within the meaning of that terminology as used in the Rule and discussed in the authorities. It might be more convenient and less expensive to effect substituted service in British Columbia but a modest degree of inconvenience and expense does not in my view justify a departure from the ordinary rule of personal service. If the task is very onerous or the expense appeared likely to be very high, then different considerations may fall to be assessed. (at para. 11)