Haqen v Zeehaqhe: ECJ 1990

References: [1990] ECR 1-1845
Ratio: ECJ ‘Article 6(2) makes provision for a special jurisdiction, which the Plaintiff may choose because of the existence, in clearly defined situations, of a particularly close connecting factor between a dispute and the court which may be called upon to hear it, with a view to the efficacious conduct of the proceedings (judgment of 22 November 1978 in Case 33/78 Somafer SA v Saar-Ferngas AG [1978] ECR 2183). The Convention thus enables the entire dispute to be heard by a single court. Consequently, the related nature of the main action and the action on a warranty or guarantee suffices to found jurisdiction on the part of the court in which the action on a warranty or guarantee has been brought, irrespective of the basis on which it has jurisdiction in the original proceedings; in this respect, the jurisdiction provided for in Article 2 and that provided for in Article 5 are equivalent.’
Jurisdiction: European
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Kinnear and Others v Falconfilms Nv and Others QBD (Bailii, [1994] EWHC QB 1, [1996] 1 WLR 920, [1994] ILPr 731, [1994] 3 All ER 42)
    The deceased had died in an accident whilst filming in Spain for the defendants. The plaintiff personal representatives sought damages here, while the defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction under the 1968 Convention, and said that the . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 19 March 2019
Ref: 512159