Search Results for: Brussels Convention 17

Click the case name for better results:

Yeda Research and Development CoLtd v Rhone -Poulenc Rorer International (Holdings) Inc and Imclone Systems Inc (Patent): IPO 17 Jun 2005

IPO Following the filing of a reference and statement by the claimant, the defendants (the proprietor and its exclusive licensee) in May 2004 sought a stay to await the outcome, initially of EPO opposition proceedings, but then when these were suspended, until the decision at first instance in parallel US entitlement proceedings expected to be … Continue reading Yeda Research and Development CoLtd v Rhone -Poulenc Rorer International (Holdings) Inc and Imclone Systems Inc (Patent): IPO 17 Jun 2005

Sarrio Sa v Kuwait Investment Authority: HL 17 Nov 1997

The parties were spanish companies. They were involved in proceedings against each other in Spain. The respondent had begun an action here for negligent misrepresentation against the appellant. The appellant argued that given the Spanish proceedings, the English court did not have jurisdiction because of article 22. Held: If the actions were related then the … Continue reading Sarrio Sa v Kuwait Investment Authority: HL 17 Nov 1997

Shahar v Tsitsekkos and others: ChD 17 Nov 2004

The defendant wished to make a claim against another party outside the jurisdiction and was granted permission to serve documents which were headed ‘defence and counterclaim’. The proposed defendant argued that such a document could be served in this way. Held: The defendant should apply to the court for leave to add the party outside … Continue reading Shahar v Tsitsekkos and others: ChD 17 Nov 2004

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

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

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

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

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

Bols Distilleries VB (T/A As Bols Royal Distilleries) and Another v Superior Yacht Services Ltd: PC 11 Oct 2006

(Gilbraltar) The parties disputed the management contract for a racing yacht, and also the juridiction of the Supreme Court of Gibraltar to hear the case. Bols said that under regulation 2(1) Gibraltar had no jurisdiction. Held: The English court had jurisdiction by virtue of the clear agreement of the parties. That parts of the agreement … Continue reading Bols Distilleries VB (T/A As Bols Royal Distilleries) and Another v Superior Yacht Services Ltd: PC 11 Oct 2006

Casio Computer Co Ltd v Sayo and others: CA 11 Apr 2001

The court was asked whether a constructive trust claim based on dishonest assistance is a matter ‘relating to tort, delict or quasi delict’ for the purpose of Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention? Held: A constructive trust claim based upon dishonest assistance is within the scope of Article 5(3). The loss took place where the … Continue reading Casio Computer Co Ltd v Sayo and others: CA 11 Apr 2001

Starlight Shipping Co v Allianz Marine and Aviation Versicherungs Ag and Others: CA 20 Dec 2012

The Alexander T, owned by the appellant and insured by the respondents was a total loss. The insurers resisted payment, the appellant came to allege improperly, and the parties had settled the claim on full payment under a Tomlin Order. The owners later began proceedings in Greece claiming what the defendants said were the same … Continue reading Starlight Shipping Co v Allianz Marine and Aviation Versicherungs Ag and Others: CA 20 Dec 2012

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

Continental Bank Na v Aeakos Compania Naviera Sa and Others: CA 26 Nov 1993

The Bank was entitled to an injunction in the UK, by virtue of the jurisdiction given in their agreement, even though it was not the UK court which was first seised of the matter. Steyn LJ said: ‘. . a claim for damages for breach of contract would be a relatively ineffective remedy. An injunction … Continue reading Continental Bank Na v Aeakos Compania Naviera Sa and Others: CA 26 Nov 1993

Gemeente Steenbergen v Baten: ECJ 14 Nov 2002

(Judgment) Brussels Convention – Scope – Action under a right of recourse under national legislation providing for payment of allowances by way of social assistance – Concept of ‘civil matters’ – Concept of ‘social security’ Citations: C-271/00, [2002] EUECJ C-271/00, [2003] 1 WLR 1996, ECLI:EU:C:2002:656 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: European Benefits Updated: 21 October 2022; Ref: … Continue reading Gemeente Steenbergen v Baten: ECJ 14 Nov 2002

In re The Alexandros T: SC 6 Nov 2013

The parties had disputed insurance claims after the foundering of the Alexandros T. After allegations of misbehaviour by the underwriters, the parties had settled the claims in a Tomlin Order. Five years later, however, the shipowners began proceedings in Greece making substantially similar allegations and claims, but under the equivalent in Greek law. In response … Continue reading In re The Alexandros T: SC 6 Nov 2013

High Tech International Ag and others v Deripaska: QBD 20 Dec 2006

The clamants brought actions for damages for torts said to have been committed by the defendants in Russia. They said that the defendant was domiciled within the jurisdiction under the EU Regulation. Held: Domicile for the issue of jurisdiction is now governed by the 1982 Act. It would not be realistic to describe the defendant … Continue reading High Tech International Ag and others v Deripaska: QBD 20 Dec 2006

Motorola Credit Corporation v Uzan and others (No 2): CA 12 Jun 2003

World-wide freezing orders had been made under the 1982 Act. The defendants were members of a Turkish family with substantial business interests in the telecommunications industry. In breach of orders made in the US some defendants had sought to hide their assets. They had failed to respond as required to orders to disclose their assest, … Continue reading Motorola Credit Corporation v Uzan and others (No 2): CA 12 Jun 2003

Owusu v Jackson, Mammee Bay Resorts Limited etc: CA 19 Jun 2002

Defendants appealed against an order refusing an order to restrain service of the proceedings on certain defendants outwith the jurisdiction. The claimant was seriously injured holidaying at a resort managed by the several defendants in Jamaica in various ways. The defendants argued that the proper forum was Jamaica. Held: The decision as to forum conveniens … Continue reading Owusu v Jackson, Mammee Bay Resorts Limited etc: CA 19 Jun 2002

Wim Harry Gerard Maronier v Bryan Larmer: CA 29 May 2002

The defendant had been a dentist in the Netherlands. An action for damages was begun against him, but then stayed. Judgment was later entered in the Netherlands after he had moved to the UK, and of which he was ignorant. There was no subsisting right of appeal. The claimant sought to enforce the judgement here. … Continue reading Wim Harry Gerard Maronier v Bryan Larmer: CA 29 May 2002

AIG Europe SA v QBE International Insurance Ltd: ComC 3 May 2001

Judges: Moore-Bick J Citations: [2001] EWHC 491 (Comm), [2002] Lloyd’s Rep IR 22, [2001] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 268, [2001] CLC 1259, [2001] 2 All ER (Comm) 622 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – AIG Europe S A v QBE International Insurance Ltd ComC 3-May-2001 A re-insurance contract incorporated terms from the main … Continue reading AIG Europe SA v QBE International Insurance Ltd: ComC 3 May 2001

Bristol Airport Plc and Another v Powdrill and Others: CA 21 Dec 1989

An airline company went into administration. The airport seized two airplanes. The administrators claimed they were property within the administration, could not be seized without a court order, and the court should exercise its discretion not to allow seizure. Held: The definition of property in the 1982 Act was wide enough to include leased property. … Continue reading Bristol Airport Plc and Another v Powdrill and Others: CA 21 Dec 1989

In re L (A child) (Abduction: Jurisdiction): FD 9 Sep 2002

The mother had brought the child from France to England. That removal was wrongful. The father, having begun proceedings in France, sought his return. Held: The father had not co-operated readily with the UK courts in bringing his application, causing excess delay. The return of the child was discretionary. In this case the child was … Continue reading In re L (A child) (Abduction: Jurisdiction): FD 9 Sep 2002

West Tankers Inc v Ras Riunione Adriatica Di Sicurta Spa and others (The Front Comor): HL 21 Feb 2007

A ship had foundered, and the owners disputed their insurance claim. The policy provided for arbitration in London, and one party sought an order to prevent the other commencing proceedings in another EU state in breach of the arbitration agreement. Held: English authority and European thought differed, and the matter should be referred to the … Continue reading West Tankers Inc v Ras Riunione Adriatica Di Sicurta Spa and others (The Front Comor): HL 21 Feb 2007

Vigreux v Michel and Another: CA 18 May 2006

The mother sought the return of her children to France. Her summons had been dismissed after balancing the policy of the Convention against the strength of the child’s objection to return together with certain welfare considerations. The discretionary balance was weighted against the making of a return order. Held: The appeal succeeded. The welfare considerations … Continue reading Vigreux v Michel and Another: CA 18 May 2006

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd: CA 24 Oct 2005

The defendants who were resident in Greece appealed a decision that the English court had jurisdiction over them, by virtue of a close connection of the matter with earlier proceedings heard here. Held: The fact that the defendants were all defendants in the earlier proeedings was what mattered. That these were new proceedings did not … Continue reading Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd: CA 24 Oct 2005

Wermuth v Wermuth: CA 4 Feb 2003

The husband had commenced proceedings for divorce in Germany. The husband was German, and the wife became German upon the marriage, but they had lived in London. The wife was second to issue, beginning proceedings in London. The district judge recorded the parties’ agreement that the German court should be seized, save of article 12 … Continue reading Wermuth v Wermuth: CA 4 Feb 2003

Rudolf Gabriel: ECJ 11 Jul 2002

Europa Brussels Convention – Request for interpretation of Articles 5(1) and (3) and 13, first paragraph, point 3 – Entitlement of a consumer to whom misleading advertising has been sent to seek payment, in judicial proceedings, of the prize which he has apparently won – Classification – Action of a contractual nature covered by Article … Continue reading Rudolf Gabriel: ECJ 11 Jul 2002

Francesco Benincasa v Dentalkit Srl: ECJ 3 Jul 1997

A contract which forms a part of the customer’s arrangements for pursuing his trade or profession is not a consumer contract and a choice of jurisdiction clause in a distribution agreement was valid. Europa In the context of the specific regime established by Article 13 et seq. of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on … Continue reading Francesco Benincasa v Dentalkit Srl: ECJ 3 Jul 1997

Sonntag v Waidmann, Waidmann and Waidmann: ECJ 21 Apr 1993

Europa 1. A claim for compensation for loss to an individual resulting from a criminal offence, even though made in the context of criminal proceedings, is civil in nature unless the person against whom it is made is to be regarded as a public authority which acted in the exercise of its powers. That is … Continue reading Sonntag v Waidmann, Waidmann and Waidmann: ECJ 21 Apr 1993

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. Citations: Times 17-Dec-1998, [1998] UKHL 49; [1999] 2 AC 127; [1999] 2 WLR 134; [1999] 1 … Continue reading 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

F Berghoefer GmbH and Co KG v ASA SA: ECJ 11 Jul 1985

Brussels Convention – Interpretation of Article 17 – Validity of an oral jurisdiction agreement confirmed in writing by one party only.‘It must be pointed out that . . article 17 of the Convention does not expressly require that the written confirmation of an oral argument should be given by the party who is to be … Continue reading F Berghoefer GmbH and Co KG v ASA SA: ECJ 11 Jul 1985

Handelsveem Bv and Others v Coreck Maritime GmbH: ECJ 1 Dec 2000

When a court looked at a choice of the jurisdiction clause, it was not necessary that the clause should withoutmore establish the jurisdiction. A clause could be effective where the forum will be ascertainable at the time by reference to a the circumstances. In this case of the clause required a dispute under a bill … Continue reading Handelsveem Bv and Others v Coreck Maritime GmbH: ECJ 1 Dec 2000

Temiz, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 13 Oct 2006

The claimant sought judicial review of the refusal by the respondent to give him permission to stay in the United Kingdom. As a Turkish national he had absconded after being ordered to be removed, and had since gone into business here. Held: The effect of the protocol was to prevent a member state bringing in … Continue reading Temiz, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 13 Oct 2006

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

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

Re E (Children) (Abduction: Custody Appeal): SC 10 Jun 2011

Two children were born in Norway to a British mother (M) and Norwegian father (F). Having lived in Norway, M brought them to England to stay, but without F’s knowledge or consent. M replied to his application for their return that the children would be at risk if returned, alleging psychological abuse by F. She … Continue reading Re E (Children) (Abduction: Custody Appeal): SC 10 Jun 2011

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Konecny v District Court In Brno-Venkov, Czech Republic: SC 27 Feb 2019

K had been convicted and sentenced in his absence. His extradition was requested under an EAW which asserted that it was based upon an enforceable judgment, but that he had an unqualified right to be retried. He argued that the delay (since 2004 for the offence) was such as render the request unjust and oppressive. … Continue reading Konecny v District Court In Brno-Venkov, Czech Republic: SC 27 Feb 2019

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

The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and Others v Meltwater Holding Bv and Others: ChD 26 Nov 2010

The claimant newspapers complained of the spidering of the web-sites and redistribution of the materials collected by the defendants to its subscribers. The defendants including the Public Relations Consultants Association (PRCA) denied that they needed a licence for the purpose. Held: The members of PRCA required licences from the claimants in order lawfully to receive … Continue reading The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and Others v Meltwater Holding Bv and Others: ChD 26 Nov 2010

Fiona Trust and Holding Corporation and others v Privalov and others: CA 24 Jan 2007

The court was asked whether when contracts have been induced by bribery and have been rescinded on discovery of the bribery, that constitutes a dispute which can be determined by arbitration in the context of a common form of arbitration clause. Held: a dispute whether the contract can be set aside or rescinded for alleged … Continue reading Fiona Trust and Holding Corporation and others v Privalov and others: CA 24 Jan 2007

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

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

Shergill and Others v Khaira and Others: SC 11 Jun 2014

The parties disputed the trusts upon which three Gurdwaras (Sikh Temples) were held. The Court of Appeal had held that the issues underlying the dispute were to be found in matters of the faith of the Sikh parties, and had ordered a permanent stay. Held: The appeal was allowed. The matter was justiciable and should … Continue reading Shergill and Others v Khaira and Others: SC 11 Jun 2014

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

BH and Another v The Lord Advocate and Another: SC 20 Jun 2012

The appellants wished to resist their extradition to the US to face criminal charges for drugs. As a married couple that said that the extraditions would interfere with their children’s rights to family life. Held: The appeals against extradition failed. The appeal was competent in that proper human rights issues arose. The allegations were of … Continue reading BH and Another v The Lord Advocate and Another: SC 20 Jun 2012

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

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

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

Youell and others v La Reunion Aerienne and others: CA 11 Mar 2009

The parties disputed whether the court had jurisdiction. The defendant insurer argued that parallel issues had been referred to arbitration in France. Held: the claim was outside the range of the arbitration agreement, and a stay, which would have been the appropriate remedy was not granted. Lord Justice Rix, Lord Justice Jacob and Lord Justice … Continue reading Youell and others v La Reunion Aerienne and others: CA 11 Mar 2009

Neste Chemicals SA and Others v DK Line Sa and Another (‘The Sargasso’): CA 4 Apr 1994

References: Times 04-Apr-1994, [1994] 3 All ER 180 Coram: Steyn LJ, Peter Gibson LJ and Sir Tasker Watkins Ratio: 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 … Continue reading Neste Chemicals SA and Others v DK Line Sa and Another (‘The Sargasso’): CA 4 Apr 1994

Neste Chemicals SA and Others v DK Line Sa and Another (The Sargasso”): CA 4 Apr 1994″

References: Times 04-Apr-1994, [1994] 3 All ER 180 Coram: Steyn LJ, Peter Gibson LJ and Sir Tasker Watkins 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’. … Continue reading Neste Chemicals SA and Others v DK Line Sa and Another (The Sargasso”): CA 4 Apr 1994″