Claimant cargo owners sought to have decided in England, their dispute with the respondent. The respondent was domiciled in a country signatory to the Convention, and had offices here.
Held: To establish jurisdiction for the English courts, the claimant had to show that there was a sufficient connection to say properly that the loss arose from operations at the branch office in England, but that was short of requiring it to be shown that the branch activities had led directly to the events the subject of the dispute. The words of article 5 should be given their natural meaning.
Judges:
Phillips of Worth Matravers, MR, Broke, Laws, LJJ
Citations:
Times 06-Feb-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 147, [2003] 4 All ER 543, [2003] 2 WLR 1296, [2003] ILPr 27, [2003] QB 1160, [2003] 2 All ER (Comm) 411
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Lloyd’s Register of Shipping v Societe Campenon Bernard ECJ 6-Apr-1995
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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Jurisdiction
Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.178987
