The plaintiff had obtained a default judgment in Austria against an Austrian partnership, and sought to enforce it in England against an English resident who was a sleeping partner in the firm. Her name was registered as a partner in the commercial register in Vienna.
Held: The claim against her failed. Although the defendant, as a partner in the firm, must be regarded as having carried on business in Vienna through an agent resident there and that, having permitted those matters to be notified to persons dealing with the firm by registration in a public register, she had impliedly agreed with those persons to submit to the jurisdiction of the court of Vienna, and that, therefore, the English courts would recognise the judgment, in this case, the judgment against the partnership firm was not enforceable against the defendant as either it was not a judgment against her personally or, if it was, by reason of the defences which would be available to her in Vienna it was not a final and conclusive judgment.
Diplock J said that it was ‘clear law that the contract . . to submit to the forum in which the judgment was obtained, may be express or implied’ and ‘It seems to me that, where a person becomes a partner in a foreign firm with a place of business within the jurisdiction of a foreign court, and appoints an agent resident in that jurisdiction to conduct business on behalf of the partnership at that place of business, and causes or permits, as in the present case, these matters to be notified to persons dealing with that firm by registration in a public register, he does impliedly agree with all persons to whom such a notification is made – that is to say, the public – to submit to the jurisdiction of the court of the country in which the business is carried on in respect of transactions conducted at that place of business by that agent.’
Diplock J
[1962] 2 QB 116
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Vizcaya Partners Ltd v Picard and Another PC 3-Feb-2016
No Contractual Obligation to Try Case in New York
(Gibraltar) The appellant had invested in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff. They were repaid sums before the fund collapsed, and the trustees now sought repayment by way of enforcement of an order obtained in New York.
Held: The . .
Disapproved – Vogel v RA Kohnstamm Ltd 1973
Enforcement at common law wa sought of an Israeli default judgment in favour of an Israeli buyer of leather against an English company. The plaintiffs argued that the defendants were resident in Israel or had by implication agreed to submit . .
Wrongly decided – Adams v Cape Industries plc ChD 1990
The piercing of the veil argument was used to attempt to bring an English public company, which was the parent company of a group which included subsidiaries in the United States, within the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States. Where a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Jurisdiction, Contract
Leading Case
Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.565112
