New South Wales Court of Appeal -The court was asked to enforce an English default judgment. The judgment debtor had ‘agree[d] to submit to the jurisdiction’ of the English court by virtue of a contractual provision that the agreement was ‘governed by and construed under the Laws of England’.
Held: Walsh J referred to the division of authority (particularly between Emanuel v Symon and Blohn v Desser) on the question whether a submission could be implied, but said that that need not be decided. If the agreement had to be an express one, it was not essential that a particular form of words should be used: it could mean only that the express terms of the contract, when properly construed, contained an agreement to submit. If an implied agreement sufficed, there was nothing which could lead to the conclusion that, if the agreement was silent on the question, a term could be implied that the judgment debtor had submitted to the jurisdiction. The fact that leave could be given to serve proceedings under RSC Order 11 by virtue of the choice of English law did not amount to a law which ‘govern[ed]’ the contract.
Judges:
Walsh J
Citations:
[1968] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 394, (1968) 70 SR (NSW) 219
Jurisdiction:
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Commonwealth
Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.565130
