Key legal question
Whether the request for relief was timely because the default judgment had to be served by edictal publication rather than to the Donatyre address.
Extracted holding
Because the court had already treated the Donatyre address as insufficient for ordinary service by assigning the accused by edict, the default judgment also had to be served edictally; the request for relief was therefore not obviously late.
Extracted reasoning
If the court knows the accused's domicile but still cites him by edict, it shows that the known address is not suitable for valid judicial service. The lower court's assumption that later information from Fribourg made service at Donatyre valid was incorrect.