TAYLOR J.
This is apparently a simple application for substituted service. Within my experience, however, it is a novel application, involving, as it does, substituted service against a limited liability company. In my view, it also gives rise to some complex issues which I propose to canvass and so although in normal applications for substituted service the facts founding the claim are strictly not necessary, in this case it seems it is necessary to give an indication of the facts.
By their specially indorsed writ of summons, the plaintiffs claim against the defendant-company ¢4,402,700 being the balance of the price of goods sold and delivered by the plaintiff-company to the defendant-company,
In this motion ex parte, the plaintiff-company on 21 April 1980 moved this court for an order of substituted service and for such further order or orders as to this court may seem just. By an affidavit in support of the motion, a clerk in the chambers of the solicitor of the plaintiffs has depose…