swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Jurisdiction - From: 1991 To: 1991
This page lists 7 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Somchai Liangsiriprasert v Government of the United States of America [1991] 1 AC 225; (1991) 92 Cr App R 77; [1990] UKPC 31
1991
PC
Lord Griffiths
Commonwealth, Crime, Jurisdiction, Extradition
(Hong Kong) Application was made for the defendant's extradition from Hong Kong to the USA. The question was whether a conspiracy entered into outside Hong Kong with the intention of committing the criminal offence of trafficking in drugs in Hong Kong was justiciable in Hong Kong although no overt act in pursuance of that conspiracy had yet taken place in Hong Kong. Held: English criminal law is generally local in its effect. The criminal law does not concern itself with crimes committed abroad. Any offence may be tried in this country even if the last act did not take place here, provided the court sees nothing contrary to international comity in its assumption of jurisdiction. Conspiracy being an inchoate offence, no 'last act' was required.
Lord Griffiths said: "Unfortunately in this Century crime has ceased to be largely local in origin and effect. Crime is now established on an international scale and the criminal law must face this new reality. Their lordships can find nothing in precedent, comity or good sense that should inhibit the common law from regarding as justiciable in England inchoate crimes committed abroad which are intended to result in the commission of criminal offences in England." and
"The English courts have decisively begun to move away from definitional obsessions and technical formulations aimed at finding a single situs of a crime by locating where the gist of the crime occurred or where it was completed. Rather, they now appear to seek by an examination of relevant policies to apply the English criminal law where a substantial measure of the activities constituting a crime take place in England, and restrict its application in such circumstances solely in cases where it can seriously be argued on a reasonable view that these activities should, on the basis of international comity, be dealt with by another country." and "Their Lordships can find nothing in precedent, comity or good sense that should inhibit the common law from regarding as justiciable in England inchoate crimes committed abroad which are intended to result in the commission of criminal offences in England." and
"It is notoriously difficult to apprehend those at the centre of the drug trade: it is only their couriers who are usually caught. If the courts were to regard the penetration of a drug dealing organisation by the agents of a law enforcement agency and a plan to tempt the criminals into a jurisdiction from which they could be extradited as an abuse of process it would indeed be a red letter day for the drug barons."
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
House of Spring Gardens v Waite; CA 1991 - [1991] 1 QB 241
The Rewia [1991] 2 Lloyds Rep 325
1991
CA
Leggatt LJ
Jurisdiction, Company
The court considered a jurisdiction clause in a bill of lading which referred to the carrier's principal place of business. The central management and control of the company was in Germany and the question was whether that was also its principal place of business. Held: It was. The shareholders and officers of the shipowning company were all German, directors' meetings were held in Hamburg, contractual commitments such as vessel charters had to be authorised from Hamburg and all earnings were remitted to Hamburg. Germany was the principal place of business rather than Hong Kong. Hong Kong was the principal place of business of the vessel's managing agents. That company was in fact and not merely legal fiction a separate entity. The 'principal' place of business of a corporation within the article meant the 'chief' or 'most important' place of its business. The principal place was not necessarily where most of its business was carried out.
Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 60
1 Citers
Kurz v Stella Musical Veranstaltungs GmbH [1992] Ch 196; [1991] 3 WLR 1046; Gazette, 04 December 1991
1991
ChD
Hoffmann J
Jurisdiction
A prorogation clause which claimed to confer exclusive jurisdiction on the courts of one country would, if it complied with Article 17 in point of form, be given effect so as to exclude any other jurisdictions which might otherwise be competent under the Convention; but a prorogation clause which bore merely to confer non-exclusive jurisdiction on the courts of one country would not be made exclusive by virtue of the Article.
1 Citers
Regina v Sansom [1991] 2 QB 130; (1991) 92 Cr App R 115
2 Jan 1991
CACD
Taylor LJ
Crime, Jurisdiction
The appellants had been charged with conspiracy contrary to section 1 of the Criminal Law Act 1977. The court rejected the argument that the principle laid down in Somchai referred only to the common law and that it could not be applied to conspiracies charged under the Act of 1977. It should now be regarded as the law of England on this point.
Criminal Law Act 1977 1
1 Cites
1 Citers
Overseas Union Insurance Ltd and others v New Hampshire Insurance Company; ECJ 27-Jun-1991 - C-351/89; [1992] QB 434; [1991] EUECJ C-351/89
Gascoigne v Pyrah [1994] 1 LPr 82; Times, 26 November 1991
26 Nov 1991
CA
Hirst LJ
Jurisdiction
The court was concerned with conflicts between different jurisdictions dealing with related matters. Hirst LJ said: "Conflicting findings of fact, on the other hand, are virtually impossible to reconcile if different judges in different jurisdictions within the EEC, hearing and seeing different witnesses, reach different conclusions which have hinged on an assessment of the reliability of individual witnesses; and of course the problem may be compounded in cases where there are different procedures in the different national courts in the way in which they hear the evidence and assess it. Moreover, different findings of fact also frequently lead to different conclusions of law."
Brussels Convention 1968 Art 22
1 Citers
