Click the case name for better results:

Hassett v South Eastern Health Board, Doherty v North Western Health Board, (Judgments Convention / Enforcement of Judgments): ECJ 2 Oct 2008

Europa Jurisdiction Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 Point 2 of Article 22 Disputes as to the validity of decisions of organs of companies Exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the State where the company has its seat Medical practitioners’ mutual defence organisation.In proceedings in Ireland relating to a medical negligence claim against the Health Board, two … Continue reading Hassett v South Eastern Health Board, Doherty v North Western Health Board, (Judgments Convention / Enforcement of Judgments): ECJ 2 Oct 2008

Baltic Insurance Group v Jordan Grand Prix Limited and Others and Quay Financial Software Limited and Others (By Counter Claim and One Other Action): HL 20 May 1998

The Brussels Convention requires an insurance company to commence a claim against an insured in the country in which it operates. This applies also to non-convention countries, and a counterclaim may not add a new party from another jurisdiction. . .

Societe D’Informatique Service Realisation Organisation v Ampersand Software Bv: ECJ 25 Sep 1995

Court’s refusal to stay enforcement of foreign court order cannot be appealed against. Different jurisdictions not to be used to get advantage on enforcement. Citations: Ind Summary 09-Oct-1995, Times 25-Sep-1995 Statutes: EC Treaty Articles 37 and 38, Brussels Convention 1968 Jurisdiction: European Citing: Reference from – Societe D’Informatique Service Realisation Org v Ampersand Software Bv … Continue reading Societe D’Informatique Service Realisation Organisation v Ampersand Software Bv: ECJ 25 Sep 1995

National Justice Compania Naviera Sa v Prudential Assurance Co Ltd (No 2): CA 15 Oct 1999

An English court does have power to order a non-resident non-party to contribute to the costs of a case, where that party was domiciled in a convention country. Here the third party was alleged to be the alter ego of the actual party. There was no requirement to have sued that third party first under … Continue reading National Justice Compania Naviera Sa v Prudential Assurance Co Ltd (No 2): CA 15 Oct 1999

Casio Computer Co Ltd v Sayo and Others: CA 8 Feb 2001

In a case alleging knowing assistance in the fraudulent transfer of funds through the banking system, acts forming part of the events had occurred within the jurisdiction. It was proper to join a defendant to the action here, even though he was resident in Spain. Under the Convention the defendants could be sued either in … Continue reading Casio Computer Co Ltd v Sayo and Others: CA 8 Feb 2001

Ace Insurance Sa/Nv v Zurich Insurance Co and Another: CA 2 Feb 2001

The doctrine of forum non conveniens could be used to prevent the prosecution in the UK in respect of a matter agreed to be conducted in Texas, even though the proper applicable law was that England. The Act did not operate to restrict the application of the doctrine in this way even in respect of … Continue reading Ace Insurance Sa/Nv v Zurich Insurance Co and Another: CA 2 Feb 2001

Frans Maas Logistics (UK) Ltd v CDR Trucking BV: ComC 23 Mar 1999

CMR Convention: Articles 31(2) and 36 – relating on jurisdiction. Brussels Convention: Article 57. Applicability in cases covered by the CMR convention.Article 31.2 of CMR to be limited to proceedings brought by same claimant against the same defendant, and that, on that basis, the lis pendens provisions of articles 21 and 22 of the Brussels … Continue reading Frans Maas Logistics (UK) Ltd v CDR Trucking BV: ComC 23 Mar 1999

Philip Alexander Securities and Futures Ltd v Bamberger and Others: ComC 8 May 1996

ComC Consumer contracts – arbitration provision – Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988 – exceptions – sections 2(b), 4 : European Union – Consumer contracts – arbitration provision – Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988 – exceptions – section 2(a) – distinction between domestic and non-domestic consumers – discrimination – Article 6 EC – freedom to provide … Continue reading Philip Alexander Securities and Futures Ltd v Bamberger and Others: ComC 8 May 1996

A v A and another (Children) (Children: Habitual Residence) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening): SC 9 Sep 2013

Acquisition of Habitual Residence Habitual residence can in principle be lost and another habitual residence acquired on the same day. Held: The provisions giving the courts of a member state jurisdiction also apply where there is an alternative jurisdiction in a non-member state such as the United States. The Regulation also deals with how child … Continue reading A v A and another (Children) (Children: Habitual Residence) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening): SC 9 Sep 2013

Phillips and Another v Robin James Symes and Robin Symes Ltd: ChD 9 Jul 2001

English proceedings were issued to claim against a partnership. Simultaneously proceedings were issued in Greece, but the Greek proceedings were served on the London parties first. The plaintiffs in Greece asked the English court to issue a stay of the English proceedings, they having issued first in Greece. The stay was granted. There had been … Continue reading Phillips and Another v Robin James Symes and Robin Symes Ltd: ChD 9 Jul 2001

Polymer Vision R and D Ltd and Others v Van Dooren: ComC 17 Nov 2011

‘jurisdiction challenge involving the scope of the bankruptcy exception in Article 1.2(b) of Council Regulation 44/2001 (‘the Judgments Regulation’) which replicates an identical provision in the Brussels Convention. If the Judgments Regulation does not apply the question is whether, in view inter alia of Council Regulation 1346/2000 . . this court is forum non conveniens … Continue reading Polymer Vision R and D Ltd and Others v Van Dooren: ComC 17 Nov 2011

Dresser UK v Falcongate Freight Management Ltd; The Duke of Yare: CA 1992

In England the court was first seised of a matter at the point when the proceedings were served, not when they were issued. Article 21 was metaphorically described as a ‘tie-break rule’ which operates on the basis of strict chronological preference’. Judges: Bingham LJ Citations: [1992] 5 CL 373, [1992] QB 502 Statutes: Brussels Convention … Continue reading Dresser UK v Falcongate Freight Management Ltd; The Duke of Yare: CA 1992

Sameon Co Sa v Nv Petrofina SA and Another (The World Hitachi Zosen): QBD 8 Apr 1996

An express contractual term will be required to displace the Convention rules on domicile. The standard wording in charterparty contracts is insufficient to do this. The word ‘adjusted’ by itself would normally be taken to refer to the process of assessment of general average contributions; more explicit wording would be needed to create a binding … Continue reading Sameon Co Sa v Nv Petrofina SA and Another (The World Hitachi Zosen): QBD 8 Apr 1996

Dollfus Mieg et Cie v CWD International Ltd; LBJ Regents Ltd and another v Dolifus Mieg et Cie: QBD 17 Mar 2003

The applicant was a Part 20 defendant in a cross action brought between two other parties. It sought to have its own claim against the original claimant heard as a counterclaim. Held: Article 6 should not be construed so widely as to allow a cross claim by someone other than the original defendant to the … Continue reading Dollfus Mieg et Cie v CWD International Ltd; LBJ Regents Ltd and another v Dolifus Mieg et Cie: QBD 17 Mar 2003

Dansommer: ECJ 27 Jan 2000

(Judgment) Brussels Convention – Article 16(1) – Exclusive jurisdiction in proceedings having as their object tenancies of immovable property – Scope Citations: C-8/98, [2000] EUECJ C-8/98, [2001] 1 WLR 1069, [2000] ECR I-3201 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: European Jurisdiction Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.162308

Berezovsky v Forbes Inc and Michaels; Glouchkov v Same: HL 16 May 2000

Plaintiffs who lived in Russia sought damages for defamation against an American magazine with a small distribution in England. Both plaintiffs had real connections with and reputations in England. A judgment in Russia would do nothing to repair the reputations in England, and accordingly the proper place to sue was in England. Under English law … Continue reading Berezovsky v Forbes Inc and Michaels; Glouchkov v Same: HL 16 May 2000

Gesellschaft fur Antriebstechnik mbH and Co. KG v Lamellen und Kupplungsbau Beteiligungs KG: ECJ 13 Jul 2006

ECJ Brussels Convention – Article 16(4) – Proceedings concerned with the registration or validity of patents – Exclusive jurisdiction of the court of the place of deposit or registration – Declaratory action to establish no infringement – Question of the patent-?s validity raised indirectly. Citations: C-4/03, [2006] EUECJ C-4/03, [2006] FSR 45, [2007] ILPr 34, … Continue reading Gesellschaft fur Antriebstechnik mbH and Co. KG v Lamellen und Kupplungsbau Beteiligungs KG: ECJ 13 Jul 2006

Akcil and Others v Koza Ltd and Another: SC 29 Jul 2019

The first claimant was an English company all of whose shares were owned by a Turkish company. The second claimant as director caused changes to the company’s constitution and share structure. The parties disputed the jurisdiction of the UK Courts to hear the claim. Held: Lord Sales said: ‘I would allow the appeals by Koza … Continue reading Akcil and Others v Koza Ltd and Another: SC 29 Jul 2019

Fort Dodge Animal Health Limited, Arthur Webster Pty Ltd, Webster Animal Health (Uk) Ltd, Willows Francis Limited, Fort Dodge Animal Health Benelux B V v Akzo Novel N V, Intervet International B V: PatC 15 Oct 1997

The English court will not be used to block proper access for a party to justice in a foreign court; matters are to be tried according to cConvention in the proper home state. Citations: Times 24-Oct-1997 Statutes: Brussels Convention 1968 Art 2 Cited by: Appeal from – Fort Dodge Animal Health Ltd v Akzo Nobel … Continue reading Fort Dodge Animal Health Limited, Arthur Webster Pty Ltd, Webster Animal Health (Uk) Ltd, Willows Francis Limited, Fort Dodge Animal Health Benelux B V v Akzo Novel N V, Intervet International B V: PatC 15 Oct 1997

Kongress Agentur Hagen GmbH v Zeehaghe BV: ECJ 15 May 1990

Europa Where a defendant domiciled in a Contracting State is sued in a court of another Contracting State pursuant to Article 5(1) of the Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgment in civil and commercial matters, that court also has jurisdiction by virtue of Article 6(2) of the Convention … Continue reading Kongress Agentur Hagen GmbH v Zeehaghe BV: ECJ 15 May 1990

Duijnstee v Goderbauer: ECJ 15 Nov 1983

There was a dispute between an inventor and the liquidator of a company concerning ownership of patents. The liquidator’s claim was that under Dutch law the inventions had been made on terms that the patents ought to belong to the company. He demanded that the inventor should be ordered to transfer not only the Dutch … Continue reading Duijnstee v Goderbauer: ECJ 15 Nov 1983

Unibank A/S v Christensen Case C-260/97: ECJ 30 Jun 1999

A document which has not been authenticated by the involvement of some public official cannot be said to be a ‘authentic instrument’ within the Brussels Convention, allowing their use in other jurisdictions. Documents signed acknowledging indebtedness allowing for levy of execution, but without any authentication were not sufficiently certain to allow enforcement in another Convention … Continue reading Unibank A/S v Christensen Case C-260/97: ECJ 30 Jun 1999

Raiffeisen Zentralbank Osterreich Aktiengesellschaft v National Bank of Greece Sa: QBD 25 Sep 1998

A term which had only been found to be implied into a contract could still prove to be central to its performance and so could be the deciding factor in a claim for jurisdiction under the Brussels Convention. Citations: Times 25-Sep-1998 Statutes: Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial … Continue reading Raiffeisen Zentralbank Osterreich Aktiengesellschaft v National Bank of Greece Sa: QBD 25 Sep 1998

Petrograde Inc and Another v Smith and Others: QBD 8 Dec 1998

The time when a co-defendant’s domicile fell to be considered under the convention was the time when process was originated not when a co-defendant was added, whether by re-issue or by service of amended writ. Citations: Times 08-Dec-1998 Statutes: Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982, Brussels Convention Art 6 International Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: … Continue reading Petrograde Inc and Another v Smith and Others: QBD 8 Dec 1998

Ot Africa Line Ltd v Fayad Hijazy and Another; Same v Fayad Hijazy and Others: QBD 28 Nov 2000

The human right to a fair trial did not amount to a right to an unfettered choice of tribunal. Contracts said that they were exclusively governed by English law and to be decided in England. Proceedings between the parties having already commenced in England some of the defendants were enjoined from continuing another action they … Continue reading Ot Africa Line Ltd v Fayad Hijazy and Another; Same v Fayad Hijazy and Others: QBD 28 Nov 2000

Hough v P and O Containers Ltd; Blohm and Voss Holding Ag and Others Third Parties: QBD 6 Apr 1998

Where a contract contained a clear exclusive jurisdiction clause, a proposed defendant had a clear right to insist on the parties using that jurisdiction. Citations: Times 06-Apr-1998, Gazette 29-Apr-1998 Statutes: Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968 Art 17 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Jurisdiction, Contract Updated: 08 … Continue reading Hough v P and O Containers Ltd; Blohm and Voss Holding Ag and Others Third Parties: QBD 6 Apr 1998

Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005

Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005

Aries Tanker Corp v Total Transport Ltd; The Aries: HL 1977

Claims for freight charges are an exception to the general rule that all claims between parties must be resolved in one action. A claim for freight cannot be a claim ‘on the same grounds’ as a counter-claim for loss or damage arising out of the carriage, for there is no set off against freight. The … Continue reading Aries Tanker Corp v Total Transport Ltd; The Aries: HL 1977

Waterford Wedgwood Plc and Another v David Vagli Ltd and Another, Haughton Third Party: ChD 13 May 1998

The sellers had supplied counterfeit Waterford crystal to a buyer in New York, arranging for the goods to be shipped from Ireland to Spain and then from Spain to Felixstowe, where they were transhipped and sent to New York. The question was whether the sellers had infringed the Waterford trade mark in the United Kingdom … Continue reading Waterford Wedgwood Plc and Another v David Vagli Ltd and Another, Haughton Third Party: ChD 13 May 1998

St Paul Dairy (Judgment): ECJ 28 Apr 2005

Brussels Convention – Provisional, including protective, measures – Hearing of witnesses Citations: C-104/03, [2005] EUECJ C-104/03, [2006] CEC 870, [2005] ILPr 31, [2006] All ER (EC) 172, [2005] ECR I-3481 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: European Jurisdiction Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.224681

Dumez France SA and Tracoba SARL v Hessische Landesbank and others: ECJ 11 Jan 1990

ECJ The expression ‘place where the harmful event occurred’ contained in Article 5(3 ) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters may refer to the place where the damage occurred, but the latter concept can be understood only as indicating the place where … Continue reading Dumez France SA and Tracoba SARL v Hessische Landesbank and others: ECJ 11 Jan 1990

Reunion Europeenne Sa and Others v Spliethoff’s Bevrachtingskantoor Bv and Another: ECJ 27 Oct 1998

French consignees of a shipment of peaches sued in France the Australian issuers of the bill of laiding under which the goods were carried (a contract claim) and the Dutch carriers and master of the ship in which they were carried (tort claims). Held: There was no jurisdiction under Article 6(1) because none of the … Continue reading Reunion Europeenne Sa and Others v Spliethoff’s Bevrachtingskantoor Bv and Another: ECJ 27 Oct 1998

Dolphin Maritime and Aviation Services Ltd v Sveriges Angartygs Assurans Forening: ComC 2 Apr 2009

The defendant sought to strike out the claim for want of jurisdiction and that it had no prospect of success. Judges: Christopher Clarke J Citations: [2009] EWHC 716 (Comm), [2009] 1 CLC 460, [2009] 2 Lloyds Rep 123 Links: Bailii Statutes: Brussels Convention 1968 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Trident Turboprop (Dublin) … Continue reading Dolphin Maritime and Aviation Services Ltd v Sveriges Angartygs Assurans Forening: ComC 2 Apr 2009

AMT Futures Ltd v Marzillier and Others: SC 1 Mar 2017

AMT entered into many financial services agreements providing for exclusive EW jurisdiction. It now sought to restrain the defendant German lawyers from encouraging litigation in Germany saying that induced breaches of the contracts. It also sought as damages the costs incurred in the German litigation. The defendant asserted lack of jurisdiction saying that the alleged … Continue reading AMT Futures Ltd v Marzillier and Others: SC 1 Mar 2017

Shevill and Others v Presse Alliance SA: HL 26 Jul 1996

A libel case against a French paper was rightly brought in UK despite the small (250 copies nationally and 5 in the plaintiff’s local area (Yorkshire)) circulation here. The Brussels Convention allows a claim for defamation in UK though the main public was abroad. Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle said: ‘Where English law presumes the publication … Continue reading Shevill and Others v Presse Alliance SA: HL 26 Jul 1996

Erich Gasser GmbH v MISAT Srl: ECJ 9 Dec 2003

The claimant Austrian company had for many years sold goods to the defendant an Italian company. Eventually it presented a claim before the court in Italy. Having obtained judgement, it later sought to enforce the order through the Austrian court relying upon a choice of forum term to that effect in the trading terms. Held: … Continue reading Erich Gasser GmbH v MISAT Srl: ECJ 9 Dec 2003

Handelskwekerij GJ Bier Bv v Mines De Potasse D’Alsace Sa: ECJ 30 Nov 1976

Europa Where the place of the happening of the event which may give rise to liability in tort, delict or quasi-delict and the place where that event results in damage are not identical, the expression ‘place where the harmful event occurred’, in article 5(3) of the convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the … Continue reading Handelskwekerij GJ Bier Bv v Mines De Potasse D’Alsace Sa: ECJ 30 Nov 1976

Kalfelis v Bankhaus Schroder, Munchmeyer, Hengst and Co and others: ECJ 27 Sep 1988

ECJ For Article 6(1) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters to apply, a connection must exist between the various actions brought by the same plaintiff against different defendants. That connection, whose nature must be determined independently, must be of such a kind … Continue reading Kalfelis v Bankhaus Schroder, Munchmeyer, Hengst and Co and others: ECJ 27 Sep 1988

Turner v Grovit and others: HL 13 Dec 2001

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 Tribunal system. The defendants had begun procedures in Spain for conciliation. The claimant had obtained an injunction … Continue reading Turner v Grovit and others: HL 13 Dec 2001

TSN Kunststoffrecycling Gmbh v Jurgens: CA 25 Jan 2002

The claimant sought to register and enforce here, a judgment obtained by default in Germany. It was argued that he had not had, under section 27(2) sufficient opportunity to make a proper reply to the proceedings, and that the Brussels Convention created a right of appeal outside the range of appeals under the Civil Procedure … Continue reading TSN Kunststoffrecycling Gmbh v Jurgens: CA 25 Jan 2002

Handelswerkerij GJ Bier BV v Mines de Potasse d’Alsace SA: ECJ 1976

The Dutch plaintiff claimed that the water supply to its nursery had been polluted by the French defendant’s discharge of waste into the Rhine in France. Held: The meaning of the expression: ‘Place where the harmful event occurred’ must be established in such a way as to acknowledge that the plaintiff has an option to … Continue reading Handelswerkerij GJ Bier BV v Mines de Potasse d’Alsace SA: ECJ 1976

Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority: ComC 12 Oct 1995

cw Conflict of laws – Brussels Convention – articles 21-22 – right to invoke – independent of domicile – forum conveniens – defendant domiciled in non-Contracting State – exclusion of common law rules – same cause of action – meaning – jurisdiction – related actions – meaning Mance J [1996] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 650, [1996] … Continue reading Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority: ComC 12 Oct 1995

Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority: CA 12 Aug 1996

[1996] EWCA Civ 575, [1997] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 113, [1997] CLC 280, [1997] IL Pr 481, Independent 03-Oct-1996 England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority ComC 12-Oct-1995 cw Conflict of laws – Brussels Convention – articles 21-22 – right to invoke – independent of domicile – forum conveniens – … Continue reading Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority: CA 12 Aug 1996

Kuwait Oil Tanker Company SAK and others v UBS AG, Qabazard: HL 12 Jun 2003

Mr Qabazard conspired with others to defraud the Kuwait Oil Tanker Company SAK and Sitka Shipping Inc of large sums of money. On 16 November 1998 Moore-Bick J gave judgment against him for over US$130m. Historically sums had been placed with the defendant, and garnishee orders were sought. Held: It is not correct to characterise … Continue reading Kuwait Oil Tanker Company SAK and others v UBS AG, Qabazard: HL 12 Jun 2003

Gambazzi v DaimlerChrysler Canada Inc v CIBC Mellon Trust Company: ECJ 2 Apr 2009

ECJ Brussels Convention Recognition and enforcement of judgments – Grounds for refusal Infringement of public policy in the State in which enforcement is sought Exclusion of the defendant from the proceedings before the court of the State of origin because of failure to comply with a court order P. Jann (Rapporteur), P [2009] EUECJ C-394/07, … Continue reading Gambazzi v DaimlerChrysler Canada Inc v CIBC Mellon Trust Company: ECJ 2 Apr 2009

The owners of the cargo lately laden on board the ship ‘Tatry’ v The owners of the ship ‘Maciej Rataj’: ECJ 6 Dec 1994

ECJ On a proper construction, Article 57 of the Brussels Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments as amended means that, where a Contracting State is also a contracting party to another convention on a specific matter containing rules on jurisdiction, that specialized convention precludes the application of the provisions of the Brussels Convention … Continue reading The owners of the cargo lately laden on board the ship ‘Tatry’ v The owners of the ship ‘Maciej Rataj’: ECJ 6 Dec 1994

Kleinwort Benson Limited v City of Glasgow District Council: HL 19 Jun 1997

Restitution when Contract Void ab initio A claim for restitution of money paid under a contract which was void ab initio is not a claim in contract, nor tort, nor delict, it was justiciable only in the court of domicile. The Brussels Convention does not decide jurisdiction. ‘But it is clearly recognised that article 5 … Continue reading Kleinwort Benson Limited v City of Glasgow District Council: HL 19 Jun 1997

British American Tobacco Denmark A/S v Kazemier Bv: SC 28 Oct 2015

One container loaded with cigarettes was allegedly hi-jacked in Belgium en route between Switzerland and The Netherlands in September 2011, while another allegedly lost 756 of its original 1386 cartons while parked overnight contrary to express instructions near Copenhagen en route between Hungary and Vallensbaek, Denmark. The consignors claimed against English main contractors who undertook … Continue reading British American Tobacco Denmark A/S v Kazemier Bv: SC 28 Oct 2015

Nussberger and Another v Phillips and Another (No 4): CA 19 May 2006

A claim was issued in London in December 2004, and then served in part in Switzerland in January 2005. One copy was removed from the bundle by a Swiss official, seeing that it had been marked ‘Nor for service out of the jurisdiction.’ That marking had been in error. After proceedings were then issued in … Continue reading Nussberger and Another v Phillips and Another (No 4): CA 19 May 2006

Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another: SC 27 Jul 2011

The claimant had produced the Star War films which made use of props, in particular a ‘Stormtrooper’ helmet designed by the defendant. The defendant had then himself distributed models of the designs he had created. The appellant obtained judgment against the respondent in the US for punitive damages, but these had not been collected, and … Continue reading Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another: SC 27 Jul 2011

Rutten v Cross Medical: ECJ 9 Jan 1997

rutten_crossECJ1997 ECJ Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments – Special jurisdiction – Court for the place of performance of the contractual obligation – Contract of employment – Place where the employee habitually carries out his work – Meaning – Work carried out in more than one Contracting State(Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968, … Continue reading Rutten v Cross Medical: ECJ 9 Jan 1997

Owusu v Jackson: ECJ 1 Mar 2005

ECJ Brussels Convention – Territorial scope of the Brussels Convention – Article 2 – Jurisdiction – Accident which occurred in a non – Contracting State – Personal injury – Action brought in a Contracting State against a person domiciled in that State and other defendants domiciled in a non – Contracting State – Forum non … Continue reading Owusu v Jackson: ECJ 1 Mar 2005

Gomez and others v Vives: CA 3 Oct 2008

The claimant appealed a finding that the court did not have jurisdiction over income payable to a trust governed by English law under which the claimant was beneficiary. Held: The appeal failed in part. Because Article 5 is in derogation from the basic principle of domicile in Article 2, the provisions of Article 5 are … Continue reading Gomez and others v Vives: CA 3 Oct 2008

Drouot assurances v Consolidated metallurgical industries and others: ECJ 19 May 1998

(Judgment) Where proceedings were brought in two member states, the second proceedings should not be automatically stayed where there was a difference in the actions such as an additional cause of action in the second claim. Lis alibi pendens is not appropriate in such a case. Cases which in fact involved different parties (ship owner … Continue reading Drouot assurances v Consolidated metallurgical industries and others: ECJ 19 May 1998

Van den Boogaard v Laumen: ECJ 27 Feb 1997

ECJ If the reasoning of a decision rendered in divorce proceedings shows that the provision which it awards is designed to enable one spouse to provide for himself or herself, or if the needs and resources of each of the spouses are taken into consideration in the determination of its amount, the decision will be … Continue reading Van den Boogaard v Laumen: ECJ 27 Feb 1997

Pacific International Sports Clubs Ltd v Soccer Marketing International Ltd and Others: ChD 24 Jul 2009

The parties disputed ownership of shares in the football club Dynamo Kiev. Claims were to be made under Ukrainian company law and in equity. The claimant (a company registered in Mauritius) sought to proceed here. The defendants (largely companies registered in the UK) said that the Ukraine was the proper jurisdiction. Held: The court declined … Continue reading Pacific International Sports Clubs Ltd v Soccer Marketing International Ltd and Others: ChD 24 Jul 2009

Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl: HL 11 Oct 2006

The House was asked as to the capacity of a limited company to sue for damage to its reputation, where it had no trading activity within the jurisdiction, and as to the extent of the Reynolds defence. The defendants/appellants had published an article which was said falsely to associate the claimants with terrorist activity. Held: … Continue reading Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl: HL 11 Oct 2006

Nwabueze v University of Law Ltd and Others: CA 13 Nov 2020

No ET Jurisdiction for Non-employment claim The claimant appealed against rejection of her claim for discrimination which she had brought in the Employment Tribunal rather than the County Court. Held: The appeal failed: ‘if a body is a governing body of a university this displaces its status as a qualification body. It follows that the … Continue reading Nwabueze v University of Law Ltd and Others: CA 13 Nov 2020

Siegfried Zelger v Sebastiano Salinitri: ECJ 7 Jun 1984

Article 21 of the Convention of 28 September 1968 must be interpreted as meaning that the court ‘first seised’ is the one before which the requirements for proceedings to become definitively pending are first fulfilled, such requirements to be determined in accordance with the national law of each of the courts concerned: ‘the Court ‘first … Continue reading Siegfried Zelger v Sebastiano Salinitri: ECJ 7 Jun 1984

Mardas v New York Times Company and Another: QBD 17 Dec 2008

The claimant sought damages in defamation. The US publisher defendants denied that there had been any sufficient publication in the UK and that the court did not have jurisdiction. The claimant appealed the strike out of the claims. Held: The master had made assessments on a summary hearing of facts which were in dispute. The … Continue reading Mardas v New York Times Company and Another: QBD 17 Dec 2008

889457 Alberta Inc v Katanga Mining Ltd and others: ComC 5 Nov 2008

The parties had set out on a joint venture with deeds providing for control of the shareholdings in each other. The claimant asserted a breach of the deed and sought a remedy. The first defendant company, incorporated in Bermuda argued that the court should decline jurisdiction infavour of the courts in Congo. The second and … Continue reading 889457 Alberta Inc v Katanga Mining Ltd and others: ComC 5 Nov 2008

Wright v Granath: QBD 16 Jan 2020

Defamation across borders – Jurisdiction The claimant began an action for defamation in an online publication. The Norwegian resident defendant had begun an action there seeking a declaration negating liability. The Court was now asked by the defendant whether under Lugano, the UK action was as to the same cause between the same parties, and … Continue reading Wright v Granath: QBD 16 Jan 2020