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: 1994 To: 1994
This page lists 12 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Tolofson v Jensen (1994) 120 DLR (4th) 289; [1994] 3 SCR 1022; [1995] 1 WWR 609; 100 BCLR (2d) 1; 26 CCLI (2d) 1; 175 NR 161; 22 CCLT (2d) 173; 51 BCAC 241; [1994] CarswellBC 1; JE 95-61; [1994] SCJ No 110 (QL); 175 NSR (2d) 161; [1994] ACS no 110; 32 CPC (3d) 141; 52 ACWS (3d) 40; 77 OAC 81; 7 MVR (3d) 202
1994
La Forest, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ
Commonwealth, Jurisdiction
Canlii (Supreme Court of Canada) Conflict of laws - Torts - Traffic accident - Injured parties not resident in province where accident occurred - Actions instituted in home provinces of injured parties - Whether lex fori or lex loci delicti should apply - If substantive law that of jurisdiction where accident occurred, whether limitation period substantive law and therefore applicable in forum or procedural law and therefore not binding on court hearing case - Automobile Insurance Act, L.Q. 1977, c. 68, ss. 3, 4 - Code civil du Bas Canada, art. 6 - Limitation of Actions Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. L-15 - Vehicles Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. V-3, s. 180(1).
These appeals deal with the "choice of law rule": which law should govern in cases involving the interests of more than one jurisdiction specifically as it concerns automobile accidents involving residents of different provinces. The first case also raises the subsidiary issue of whether, assuming the applicable substantive law is that of the place where the tort arises, the limitation period established under that law is inapplicable as being procedural law and so not binding on the court hearing the case,
La Forest J said: "the purpose of substantive / procedural classification is to determine which rules will make the machinery of the forum court run smoothly as distinguished from those determinative of the rights of both parties."
1 Citers
[ Canlii ]
Bank of Baroda v Vysya Bank Limited [1994] 2 Lloyd's Rep 87
1994
ChD
Mance J
Banking, Jurisdiction
An Indian buyer had agreed to purchase a consignment of Latvian steel through its London office. The buyer instructed Vysya to issue a credit in favour of the seller beneficiary. The credit was confirmed by the Bank of Baroda's London office. The seller presented the documents stipulated under the credit to Bank of Baroda and was paid. The Bank of Baroda then sent the documents to Vysya in India claiming reimbursement. Vysya refused to pay and Baroda issued proceedings in England seeking reimbursement. Baroda sought leave to issue the writ and serve it out of the jurisdiction on the grounds, inter alia, that its contract with Vysya was governed by English law. Held: Dealing with that question under Article 4 of the Rome Convention, under a contract between an issuing bank and a confirming bank the performance which is characteristic of the contract is the addition by the confirming bank of its confirmation of the credit and its honouring of the obligations thereby accepted in relation to the beneficiary. That being so, if the presumption in Article 4(2) were applied, the contract between the issuing bank and the confirming bank would be governed by English law being the law of the place of business through which the Bank of Baroda was to effect its performance. "In the present case the application of art. 4(2) would lead to an irregular and subjective position where the governing law of a letter of credit would vary according to whether one was looking at the position of the confirming or the issuing bank. It is of great importance to both beneficiaries and banks concerned in the issue and operation of international letters of credit that there should be clarity and simplicity in such matters. Article 4(5) provides the answer. The Rome Convention was not intended to confuse legal relationships or to disrupt normal expectations in the way which is implicit in Vysya's submissions".
1 Citers
The Nile Rhapsody [1994] 1LLR 382
1994
CA
Jurisdiction
1 Cites
1 Citers
Kinnear and Others v Falconfilms Nv and Others [1994] EWHC QB 1; [1996] 1 WLR 920; [1994] ILPr 731; [1994] 3 All ER 42
27 Jan 1994
QBD
Phillips J
Jurisdiction, Personal Injury
The deceased had died in an accident whilst filming in Spain for the defendants. The plaintiff personal representatives sought damages here, while the defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction under the 1968 Convention, and said that the death actually occurred as a consequence of the negligence of his medical treatment in Spain.
Brussels Convention on Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments 1968 - Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 1 - Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Kinnear and Others v Falconfilms Nv and Others Times, 01 March 1994; [1994] EWHC QB 1; [1996] 1 WLR 920; [1994] 3 All ER 42; [1994] ILPr 731
27 Jan 1994
QBD
Phillips J
International, Personal Injury, Health and Safety, Jurisdiction
The actor Roy Kinnear died on being thrown from a horse while making a film in Spain. His widow sought damages from the fim company who in turn sought to issue a third party notice against those involved in Spain. Held: A third party claim with a sufficient nexus may bring a main claim with Brussels Convention.
[ Bailii ]
Foxen v Scotsman Publications Ltd and Another Ind Summary, 28 March 1994; Times, 17 February 1994
17 Feb 1994
QBD
Jurisdiction, Defamation, Litigation Practice
A transfer for forum conveniens reasons is not possible between jurisdictions within the UK, and an action in England would not be stayed to allow an intended action in Scotland to proceed on that basis.
Neste Chemicals SA and Others v DK Line Sa and Another ("The Sargasso") Times, 04 April 1994; [1994] 3 All ER 180
4 Apr 1994
CA
Steyn LJ, Peter Gibson LJ and Sir Tasker Watkins
Litigation Practice, Jurisdiction
An English Court becomes seised of a case on the service of the writ. Steyn LJ: "the general thrust of the Dresser UK Ltd case is not only binding on us but . . . is correct". There were no "exceptions to the rule that date of service marks the time when the English court becomes definitively seised of proceedings". The ECJ in the Zelger case had "emphasise[d] the importance of certainty in national procedural laws", and that "a 'date of service' rule would be readily comprehensible not only in England but also in other Contracting States."
Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters
1 Cites
1 Citers
H J Banks and Co Ltd v British Coal Corporation Times, 13 May 1994; C-128/92; [1994] 5 CMLR 30; [1994] EUECJ C-128/92; [1994] ECR I-1209
13 Apr 1994
ECJ
Advocate-General Van Gerven
European, Utilities, Jurisdiction
The European Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over ECSC treaty disputes. The duty of sincere cooperation imposed the obligation on the national court to mitigate as far as possible in the interests of the Community the risk of a conflicting ruling. "As a body which supervises compliance with the Community rules of competition and has specialised departments for that purpose, the Commission has many years of experience with the result that its findings carry a degree of authority, although such authority is not binding. However, it is self-evident that no obstacles may be placed in the path of third parties seeking to challenge before the national court findings which the Commission has arrived at in a decision of that kind. If, on the basis of the parties' arguments, the national court comes to the conclusion that the issues of fact and/or law decided by the Commission are incorrect or insufficient, or if at any rate it has serious doubts in that regard, then in the light of the Delimitis judgment it must take the following course of action: in the case of findings which carried no weight in the final decision and do not therefore underlie the reasoning of the Commission, the national court is at liberty to adopt a different interpretation: in those circumstances the risk of conflicting decisions and the resultant impairment of the principle of legal certainty is extremely small. On the other hand, in the case of findings which have an influence on the final decision arrived at by the Commission, the national court is well advised, in accordance with the provisions of its national procedural law, to suspend the proceedings in the case and to seek the necessary information from the Commission or make a direct reference to the court for a preliminary ruling concerning the validity of the decision in question or the interpretation of the relevant Community competition rules."
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Gidrxsime Shipping Co Ltd v Tantomar Transporters Maritimos Ltd Times, 27 May 1994; Gazette, 13 July 1994; [1995] 1 WLR 299
27 May 1994
QBD
Jurisdiction, Litigation Practice
The disclosure of papers which are outside the jurisdiction can be ordered within Mareva proceedings, and after judgment.
1 Citers
Lieber v Gobel [1994] ECR I-2535; [1994] EUECJ C-292/93
9 Jun 1994
ECJ
Jurisdiction
ECJ (Judgment) Brussels Convention - Jurisdiction in proceedings which have as their object rights in rem in, or tenancies of, immovable property - Claim for compensation for use.
[ Bailii ]
Balkanbank v Taher and Others (No 3) Times, 01 December 1994; Gazette, 05 January 1995
1 Dec 1994
CA
Litigation Practice, Jurisdiction
The court will allow a counterclaim on an undertaking after the action had ceased in other Jurisdiction, and the court had power to award damages arising from a Mareva injunction obtained in Ireland.
1 Cites
The owners of the cargo lately laden on board the ship 'Tatry' v The owners of the ship 'Maciej Rataj'; ECJ 6-Dec-1994 - Times, 28 December 1994; C-406/92; [1994] EUECJ C-406/92; [1995] 1 Lloyd's Rep 302; [1995] ILPr 81; [1999] QB 515; [1995] All ER (EC) 229; [1994] ECR I-5439; [1995] CLC 275; [1999] 2 WLR 181
