Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

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.  














Jurisdiction - From: 1996 To: 1996

This page lists 18 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.

 
MacSteel Commercial Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Thermasteel V (Canada) Inc [1996] CLC 1403
1996
CA
Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Millett LJ
Jurisdiction, Contract
The South African and Canadian parties had contracted subject to the law of England. The Canadian company said that England remained inappropriate as the choice of forum. Held: Jurisdiction was declined.
The distinction between the choice of English law and a contractual choice of an English forum was a distinction of major importance when choosing a jurisdiction. Millett LJ said that the judge had made a fundamental error in equating choice of law with choice of forum.
1 Citers


 
Ahmed v Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia [1996] ICR 25
1996
CA
Peter Gibson LJ
Employment, Jurisdiction
Where a defence had been filed to an action without a claim for state immunity having been made, it would have to be shown that the head of mission had submitted to the jurisdiction.
State Immunity Act 1978
1 Citers


 
Caltex Singapore Pte Ltd v BP Shipping Ltd [1996] 1 Lloyd's Law Rep. 286
1996

Clarke J
Damages, Jurisdiction
A provision of Singapore law giving a ship-owner the right to limit his liability for damage resulting from a collision in Singapore was procedural, or at least not substantive. The limitation in question did not qualify the right of the claimants and could not be regarded as a matter of substantive law for the purposes of the conflicts of laws.
1 Citers


 
Egon Oldendorff v Libera Corporation [1996] I Lloyd's Law Rep 380
1996

Clarke J
Jurisdiction
Conflict of laws - “It is sufficient to say that the party relying upon art. 3 must demonstrate with reasonable certainty that the parties have chosen a particular law as the governing or applicable law. "
1 Citers



 
 Manchester City Council v McCann and Another; CA 1-Feb-1996 - Times, 01 February 1996

 
 Milor SRL and Others v British Airways Plc; CA 15-Feb-1996 - Times, 15 February 1996; [1996] QB 702
 
Sameon Co Sa v Nv Petrofina SA and Another (The World Hitachi Zosen) Times, 08 April 1996
8 Apr 1996
QBD
Justice Langley
Transport, Jurisdiction
An express contractual term will be required to displace the Convention rules on domicile. The standard wording in charterparty contracts is insufficient to do this. The word "adjusted" by itself would normally be taken to refer to the process of assessment of general average contributions; more explicit wording would be needed to create a binding agreement as to the place of payment. Consequently, the wording of the clause was not sufficiently specific to bring the contract within article 5(1) or article 17 of the Brussels Convention, thereby enabling the general rule conferring jurisdiction on the courts of the defendants' country of domicile to be ousted.
1968 Brussels Convention 5(1) 17 - Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982

 
The Mahkutai Times, 24 April 1996; [1996] AC 650; [1996] 3 WLR 1
24 Apr 1996
PC
Lord Goff of Chieveley
Transport, Commonwealth, Jurisdiction, Contract, Arbitration
(Hong Kong) The question was whether shipowners, who were not parties to the bill of lading contract between the charterers and carriers on the one part, and the cargo-owners, the bill of lading being a charterer's bill, could enforce against the cargo-owners an exclusive jurisdiction clause contained in that contract. Held: Ship owners may not rely on an exclusive jurisdiction clause in a charterer's contract. They could not because the Himalaya clause in the bill of lading, which extended the benefit of all "exceptions, limitations, provision, conditions and liberties herein benefiting the carrier" to "servants, agents and subcontractors of the carrier" did not include the exclusive jurisdiction clause because an exclusive jurisdiction clause is a mutual agreement and does not benefit only one party. Rather the rights conferred entail correlative obligations. A contract (and in particular a Himalaya clause) must be construed to give commercial effect if possible.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Caspian Basin Specialised Emergency Salvage Administration and Another v Bouyges Offshore SA (No 2) [1997] 2 Lloyd's Rep 485; [1997] ILPr 472
10 May 1996
ComC
Morison J
Transport, Jurisdiction, Contract
ComC Towage contract – anti-suit injunction – jurisdiction clause


 
 Regina v Atlan and Atlan; CACD 10-Jun-1996 - [1996] EWCA Crim 610
 
Michael Gayle v the Queen (Jamaica) Times, 02 July 1996; Appeal No 40 of 1995; Appeal No 40 of 1995; [1996] UKPC 3; [1996] UKPC 18; [2012] ECHR 1636; [2012] ECHR 1635; [2012] ECHR 1637; [1990] ECHR 34; [2009] ECHR 619; [1980] ECHR 9; [1997] ECHR 205; [2014] ECHR 293; [1978] ECHR 8; [2010] ECHR 2263; [1994] ECHR 59; [2011] ECHR 2422; [1985] ECHR 14; [2016] ECHR 699; [2016] ECHR 704; [2016] ECHR 986; [2017] ECHR 32
2 Jul 1996
PC

Jurisdiction, Criminal Practice, Commonwealth
The judicial Committee of the Privy-Council is not to be used as second court of appeal on matters of fact.
[ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Dubai Bank Ltd v Abbas and Another [1997] ILPr 308; [1996] EWCA Civ 1342
17 Jul 1996
CA
Simon Brown, Saville, Aldous LJJ
Jurisdiction
The defendant sought to set aside service of a claim outside the jurisdiction, saying that no good and arguable case had been made out that he was domiciled in the UK. The bank said that he owned a house in London. Held: Although domicile is defined in terms of "residence", this concept must be construed in accordance with its ordinary meaning and connotes a settled or usual place of abode. There was no evidence to rebut the Defendant's claim that he usually stayed with friends or in a hotel. There was thus no "good arguable case" that he owned a property here or that he was registered as an occupier for any purpose.
Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 41 42 43 44 45 46
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Shevill and Others v Presse Alliance SA; HL 26-Jul-1996 - Gazette, 16 October 1996; Times, 26 July 1996; [1996] AC 959

 
 Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority; CA 12-Aug-1996 - [1996] EWCA Civ 575; [1997] 1 Lloyd's Rep 113; [1997] CLC 280; [1997] IL Pr 481; Independent, 03 October 1996

 
 Teco Europe Limited v Trans India Lamps Limited; CA 2-Oct-1996 - [1996] EWCA Civ 633

 
 Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority; CA 14-Nov-1996 - [1996] EWCA Civ 965
 
Owners of the cargo laden on Board the ship 'Bergen' v Owners of the ship 'Bergen' Unreported, 20 November 1996
20 Nov 1996
AdCt
Clarke J
Jurisdiction
ComC Conflict of laws - jurisdiction - Brussels Convention - article 17 - 'Arrest Convention' 1952 article 7 - conflict - Brussels Convention - article 57 - resolution - Brussels Convention - article 21 - decline jurisdiction – meaning

 
Crescent Oil and Shipping Services Ltd v Importang UEE and Others [1998] 1 WLR 919; [1997] 3 All ER 428; [1997] CLC 1198
19 Dec 1996
ComC
Thomas J
Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction clause – issue as to whether state was a party to the clause – compliance with s 12(5) of State Immunity Act

 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.