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 … Continue reading Gascoigne v Pyrah: CA 26 Nov 1991
Jurisdiction on contract of international trade chosen by explicit term. Citations: Times 25-Feb-1997, C-106/95, [1997] EUECJ C-106/95 Links: Bailii Statutes: Brussels Convention 1968 International, European Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.83329
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
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
The Convention can no longer apply once the proceedings had been properly discontinued. Citations: Times 15-Aug-1996 Statutes: Brussels Convention 1968 21/22 Transport Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82405
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
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
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
A Convention action must be based upon a right in rem not in personam. An action for a declaration that a person holds immovable property as a trustee and for an order requiring that person to execute such documents as are required to vest legal ownership under the lex situs in the plaintiff does not … Continue reading Webb v Webb: ECJ 17 May 1994
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
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
A counterclaim by insurers had to be limited to the original defendants. There is no jurisdiction to join additional third parties who were not within the jurisdiction. . .
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 . .
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 . .
Brussels Convention incorporated into law and only one ship arrestable. . .
Divorce order made to ensure spouse’s maintenance is enforceable in convention countries. . .
The words of Article 5(3) are to be given an autonomous meaning and are not to be interpreted by reference to the definition of a cause of action under the particular national law concerned. . .
Citations: [2003] EWCA Civ 145 Links: Bailii Statutes: Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Jurisdiction Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.181134
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
Brussels Convention. Bankruptcy and proceedings relating to the winding-up of insolvent companies or other legal persons. Action for making good the deficiency. – ‘it is necessary, if decisions relating to bankruptcy and winding-up are to be excluded from the scope of the Convention, that they must derive directly from the bankruptcy or winding-up’ Europa 1. … Continue reading Gourdain v Nadler: ECJ 22 Feb 1979
The claimant had been employed as a solicitor by the respondent at locations across Europe, and came to claim in England that they had wrongly implicated him in unlawful activity. The company sought to issue proceedings in Spain. Held: The Brussels Convention was based upon trust and respect between contracting states. The Convention did not … Continue reading Turner v Grovit: ECJ 27 Apr 2004
The plaintiff had been injured in an accident and had sued and recovered damages for his injuries in France. Later, his condition deteriorated. In France he would have been able to revive his action to claim further damages, but he sought a similar right from an English Court, claiming a right to do so under … Continue reading Henderson v Jaouen and Another: CA 1 Feb 2002
The need to avoid conflict between trade marks registered in more than one country within the community was not dealt with by the Directive, but regard had to taken of the Convention. The Cour d’Appel had issued a final judgment in proceedings for registration of the mark in France. Held: An English court was not … Continue reading Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Prudential Insurance Co of America: CA 12 Mar 2003
The claimant had failed to obtain an order under a compromise agreement ordering that a foreign resident was not to be contacted. Held: The place of performance of an obligation not to contact somebody under the Convention was the place of residence of the person who was not to be contacted, not that of the … Continue reading Kenburn Waste Management Ltd v Bergmann: CA 30 Jan 2002
By a contract, a party accepted an obligation not to contact persons in a certain country. When a breach was alleged, the question arose as to in which jurisdiction the breach had occurred. It was held that the obligation was a negative obligation and although it appeared to fall upon the person who agreed to … Continue reading Kenburn Waste Management Ltd v Bergmann: ChD 9 Jul 2001
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
Actions which would be deemed to have been undertaken by a branch of company need not necessarily be performed where the branch is physically located. Citations: Times 03-May-1995, C-439/93, [1995] EUECJ C-439/93 Links: Bailii Statutes: Brussels Convention1968 5(5) Cited by: Cited – Anton Durbeck GmbH v Den Norske Bank ASA CA 3-Feb-2003 Claimant cargo owners … Continue reading Lloyd’s Register of Shipping v Societe Campenon Bernard: ECJ 6 Apr 1995
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
The appellants were all Danish companies put into liquidation for asset stripping in contravention of Danish law. The respondent was resident in the UK and had owned them. The Danish tax authorities issued tax demands and the liquidators now sought a similar sum in damages against the respondent. Held: An English court will not enforce … Continue reading QRS 1 APS and others v Frandsen: CA 21 May 1999
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
The words ‘the document which instituted the proceedings’ contained in article 27, point 2, of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters cover any document, such as the order for payment (zahlungsbefehl) in german law, service of which enables the plaintiff, under the law … Continue reading Klomps v Michel: ECJ 16 Jun 1981
Where action started in one country before the Convention, and second in another after the Convention came into effect, the second action must be stayed. Citations: Times 26-Nov-1997, C-163/95, [1997] EUECJ C-163/95 Links: Bailii Statutes: Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968 Jurisdiction: European Jurisdiction Updated: 20 … Continue reading Von Horn v Cinnamond: ECJ 26 Nov 1997
The Brussels Convention rules allowing jurisdiction apply whenever the proposed defendant is domiciled in a convention country. The plaintiff need not be. The special rules on jurisdiction which apply to insurance cases do not apply to reinsurance contracts. Citations: Times 09-Aug-2000, C-412/98, [2000] EUECJ C-412/98 Links: Bailii Statutes: Brussels Convention on Enforcement of Judgments in … Continue reading Group Josi Reinsurance Company Sa v Universal General Insurance Company: ECJ 9 Aug 2000
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
In order to use the convention to give a country jurisdiction in a claim involving the payment of money only, it was not enough that the vendor had the option of paying in the UK, or that other parts of the contract might have been performed in the UK. They had to establish that Scotland … Continue reading Montagu Evans v Young: OHCS 19 Sep 2000
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
(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
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
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
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
The Court considered whether the future of two little girls, aged four and two years, should be decided by the courts of this country or by the authorities in Hungary. Both children were born in England and lived all their lives here. But their parents were Hungarian and the children were nationals of Hungary, not … Continue reading In Re N (Children): SC 13 Apr 2016
Where a court is seised of one case arising from a breach of contract arising within its own jurisdiction, it does not have power also to deal with a claim arising under the same contract but arising from a different breach occurring in a different . .
(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 . .
In a dispute between an Italian company and British one, each sought to have the case heard in its own country. The British company asserted that the case begun in Italy had been begun after at best misrepresentation by the other company, and sought . .
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 . .
Normally a court within the European community could not refuse to enforce a judgment of another members state. It could do so however where the judgment had been obtained by virtue of a procedure which denied the right of a defendant to appear . .
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 . .
On a proper construction of the expression ‘place where the harmful event occurred’ in Article 5(3) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters as amended by the Convention . .
The dutch based claimant sought damages for wrongful termination of what it said was a long-term contract. The claimant in Austria claimed the price of goods sold and delivered pursuant to a number of one-off contracts to which the defendant . .
The claimant in Germany sought to enforce a contract by claiming the price of a delivered machine; the claimant in Italy asked for a declaration that no contract had been entered into or, if it had, that it had been discharged by repudiatory conduct . .
Proceedings were brought in England. The respondents sought a stay, saying the company was subject to insolvency proceedings in Germany.
Held: Our domestic insolvency law was not applicable to foreign proceedings, and so could not be used to . .
The claimant sought damages after the defendant had negligently failed to arrange for the service of the claimant’s defamation proceedings on a defendant in Iceland leaving the action time barred.
Held: The Claimant had not acted unreasonably . .
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 . .
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 . .
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
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″
