Lord Portarlington v Soulby; 10 Dec 1833

References: [1834] 3 My & K 104, [1833] EngR 932, (1833) 6 Sim 356, (1833) 58 ER 628 (A)
Links: Commonlii
The court of appeal recognised its ability to restrain the commencement of proceedings in other courts and jurisdictions as to the same matter. The power was grounded not upon ‘any pretension to the exercise of judicial rights abroad’ but upon the fact that the party being restrained is subject to the in personam jurisdiction of the English court.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Turner -v- Grovit and others HL ([2002] ICR 94, House of Lords, Bailii, Gazette 14-Feb-02, [2001] UKHL 65, [2002] 1 WLR 107, [2002] 1 All ER 960 (Note), [2002] 1 All ER (Comm) 320 (Note), [2002] IRLR 358, [2002] ILPr 28, [2002] CLC 463)
    The applicant was a solicitor employed by a company in Belgium. He later resigned claiming unfair dismissal, saying he had been pressed to become involved in unlawful activities. The defendants sought to challenge the jurisdiction of the English . .