swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
International - From: 2001 To: 2001
This page lists 15 cases, and was prepared on 08 August 2015.
Andrea Merzario Ltd -v- Internationale Spedition Leitner Gesellschaft Gmbh Times, 27 February 2001; Gazette, 01 March 2001
23 Jan 2001
CA
International, Road Traffic
When assessing just when a case is pending for the purposes of deciding priority as between jurisdictions competing to hear a case, the determining factor is the date of service, not the date of issue. Proceedings were issued in Vienna then in England, but the English papers were served first. Accordingly they were already pending in England and jurisdiction followed accordingly.
Convention for the International Carriage of Goods by Road 31 - Carriage of Goods by Road Act 1965
Ace Insurance Sa/Nv -v- Zurich Insurance Co and Another; CA 2-Feb-2001 - Times, 27 February 2001; Gazette, 22 February 2001
Shansal -v- Al-Kishtaini Times, 08 March 2001
8 Mar 2001
CA
International, Commercial, Human Rights
The restrictions imposed on trading with residents of Iraq continued to apply even if the person involved left Iraq. A simple change of address could not be allowed to be used to circumvent important international provisions. Provisions existed for assessing such residence. Even so, surprising effects might follow. In this case, the former resident would not be allowed to enforce what was an illegal contract. A claimant could not recover where to do so he would have to rely upon his own illegal act. This fell within the exemption allowed under human rights law as being in the public interest and subject to law.
Control of Gold, Securities, Payments and Credits (Republic of Iraq) Directions 1990 (1990 No 1616) - Human Rights Act 1998
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Kaur (Justice, Intervener) Case C-192/99 Times, 08 March 2001
8 Mar 2001
ECJ
Immigration, European, International
The applicant had a British Passport, but had a British overseas citizen without a right of residence. Temporary leave to stay was renewed but eventually terminated. She claimed to be a citizen and therefore under European law entitled to freedom of movement within the EU. When the UK became a member of the EU it declared how it wished nationality to be defined. This was renewed and altered with the new Immigration Act. Customary international law allowed states to have different classes of citizenship with different rights, and her rights were determined by reference to the 1982 declaration.
British Nationality Act 1981 - ECTreaty Art 17 and 18
Shansal -v- Al-Kishtaini Gazette, 26 April 2001
26 Apr 2001
CA
International, Commercial, Human Rights
The restrictions imposed on trading with residents of Iraq continued to apply even if the person involved left Iraq. A simple change of address could not be allowed to be used to circumvent important international provisions. Provisions existed for assessing such residence. Even so, surprising effects might follow. In this case, the former resident would not be allowed to enforce what was an illegal contract. A claimant could not recover where to do so he would have to rely upon his own illegal act. This fell within the exemption allowed under human rights law as being in the public interest and subject to law.
Control of Gold, Securities, Payments and Credits (Republic of Iraq) Directions 1990 (1990 No 1616) - Human Rights Act 1998
Dombrowicz -v- Gray Or Dumbrowicz for an Order Under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985; SCS 2-May-2001 - [2001] ScotCS 103
In Re Banco Nacional De Cuba Times, 18 May 2001; Gazette, 07 June 2001; [2001] 1 WLR 2039
7 Jun 2001
ChD
Lightman J
International, Civil Procedure Rules, Insolvency, Litigation Practice
Where it was alleged that shares in a UK company had been sold at an undervalue, so as to allow a challenge in insolvency proceedings, the leave of the court was still required if the pleadings were to be served abroad. When the court considered such an application, it had to look not just at the fact that the property to which the claim related is in the jurisdiction, but also at reality of the extent of the connection with the UK, and the difficulties if any of enforcement. Here the claimant had not demonstrated that the purpose of the transaction might be to defeat creditors, and one would, in its own jurisdiction, enjoy immunity from enforcement. Section 423 "extends to any claim for relief, whether for damages or otherwise, so long as it is related to property located within the jurisdiction" and "the claim under section 423 relates to the shares and particularly the disposition of the shares." By CPR 6.20(10) the court may assume jurisdiction if the whole subject-matter of the claim relates to property situated in England.
Lightman J: "The critical differences between RSC, O 11, r 1(1)(g) and CPR 6.20(10) is the substitution for the words "land situate within the jurisdiction" of the words "relates to property located within the jurisdiction". The implications are that: (1) the rule is no longer limited to land and now extends to personal property; and (2) instead of the whole claim having to be confined to a claim to a proprietary or possessory interest, it is sufficient that the whole claim relates to property. The evident purpose of the new rule is to lay down a single rule in place of the three earlier rules which embraces and extends beyond the contents of those rules. It is to be noted that at p 128 of the Autumn 2000 Civil Procedure ("White Book") the comment is made on CPR 6.20(10): "This wide and new provision is no longer confined to land and the old cases are redundant." In my view on its proper construction the rule cannot be construed as confined to claims relating to the ownership or possession of property. It extends to any claim for relief (whether for damages or otherwise) so long as it is related to property located within the jurisdiction. This construction vests in the Court a wide jurisdiction, but since the jurisdiction is discretionary the Court can and will in each case consider whether the character and closeness of the relationship is such that the exorbitant jurisdiction against foreigners abroad should properly be exercised."
Civil Procedure Rules 6.20. - Insolvency Act 1986 423
1 Citers
Shanning International Ltd (in liquidation) -v- Lloyds Bank plc Lloyds Bank plc -v- Rasheed Bank; HL 2-Jul-2001 - Times, 02 July 2001; Gazette, 23 August 2001; [2001] UKHL 31; [2001] 1 WLR 1462; [2001] 3 CMLR 14
Hulse and Others -v- Chambers and Another Times, 13 July 2001
13 Jul 2001
CA
Damages, Personal Injury, International
A claimant in England sought damages for personal injuries for an accident which had occurred in Greece. Although the law which decided liability was the law of Greece, the calculation of damages is a procedural issue, and in an English court was to be assessed according to English rules. The assessment of damages remained in principle a jury question, even though for many years the judge had undertaken the task.
Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 14 (3) (b)
Regina (Channel Tunnel Group Ltd and Another) -v- Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions Times, 07 August 2001
23 Jul 2001
CA
Gibson LJ, Law LJ, Nourse Sir
Transport, International
The Secretary had imposed requirements on the Channel Tunnel operators for security and defence in the tunnel. The company argued that such a requirement must be the product of consultation between the signatory governments. The Secretary argued that it was enough that the government of France had not dissented. Held: The Treaty clearly required consultation before the making of a joint order, and in fact an order required the positive agreement of both governments. There is a clear difference between the absence of disagreement, and the presence of assent.
Channel Tunnel Act 1987 11 - Treaty concerning the Construction and Operation by Private Concessionaires of a Channel Tunnel Fixed Link 1986
Lukowlak -v- Unidad Editorial SA (No 1); QBD 23-Jul-2001 - Times, 23 July 2001; [2001] EMLR 46
Glencore International AG -v- Metro Trading International Inc and others [2001] EWHC 490 (Comm); [2001] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 283
1 Aug 2001
ComC
Moore-Bick J
Contract, International
Under English conflicts of laws rules the transfer of title to movable property is governed by the law of the place where the property is situated.
Moore-Bick J commented obiter on a dictum of Millett J in Macmillan: "However, if the lex situs rule in relation to movables rests, at least in part, on a recognition of the practical control exercised by the state in which they are situated, there is something to be said for applying whatever rules of law the courts of that state would actually apply in determining such questions [and a passing reference was made to Dicey & Morris, The Conflict of Laws (13th edn)]".
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
McElhinney -v- Ireland; Al-Adsani -v- United Kingdom; Fogarty -v- United Kingdom; ECHR 21-Nov-2001 - Times, 26 November 2001; 37112/97; 35763/97; 31253/96; 5763/97; [2001] 34 EHRR 302; [2001] ECHR 752; [2001] ECHR 753; [2001] ECHR 754; (2002) 34 EHRR 11; 35763/97; [2001] ECHR 761; [2001] ECHR 762; [2001] ECHR 763; (2001) 34 EHRR 273; 12 BHRC 88; (2002) 34 EHRR 12
Turner -v- Grovit and others; HL 13-Dec-2001 - [2002] ICR 94; Gazette, 14 February 2002; [2001] UKHL 65; [2002] 1 WLR 107; [2002] 1 All ER 960 (Note); [2002] 1 All ER (Comm) 320 (Note); [2002] IRLR 358; [2002] ILPr 28; [2002] CLC 463
Dardana Ltd -v- Yukos Oil Company Times, 04 February 2002
21 Dec 2001
QBD
Chambers J
International, Costs, Arbitration
The defendant sought to challenge the enforcement here of a foreign arbitration award. It sought security for costs. Held: The action was not a challenge to the award itself, but rather to challenge an attempt to enforce it in England. The challenge was therefore in its nature defensive, and accordingly the courts did have power to require security for costs against the claimant.
Practice Direction: Arbitrations (Civil Procedure volume 2, paragraph 2B-1) 31.3 - Arbitration Act 1996 103
1 Cites
1 Citers