There are two basic types of court proceedings in the Court of Queen’s Bench: actions and applications. The General Rewrite Committee is of the view that the distinction between actions and applications should be retained. It favours having two ways to commence proceedings: one for actions and one for applications. It proposes to discard the archaic petition, and instead provide that in circumstances previously calling for the use of a petition, applications should be commenced by originating notice. The special procedure in Rules 394-395 should be dispensed with, and applications formerly brought under this procedure should be commenced by originating notice. Three situations in which an application may be commenced by originating notice are: where a statute or rule explicitly or implicitly authorizes it; where there is unlikely to be a substantial dispute of fact; and where there is no one to serve as respondent. The Committee proposes that Rule 6.1 (place of commencement) and Rule 237 (place of trial) be rolled into a single provision that would contain reference to the dual residence of parties as currently found in rule 6.1 and to the location of land as found in Rule 237. The place of commencement should govern applications and trial. The court should continue to have overriding jurisdiction to alter venue in appropriate circumstances. The Committee proposes providing for an alternative form of personal service on individuals by leaving a document with an adult person residing at the individual’s place of residence, and mailing another copy to the individual at that address. The Committee also proposes that the provision for service by “double registered mail” be eliminated and that the substitutional service rule, with minor changes, be retained. In specified circumstances similar to those now listed in Rules 30, a court order should no longer be required for service outside the province. The Rules should provide for court authority to authorize service out of Alberta.