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.
Judges:
Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Millett LJ
Citations:
[1996] CLC 1403
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Sawyer v Atari Interactive Inc ChD 1-Nov-2005
The claimant owned the copyright in several successful computer games. He had granted licenses for the use of the software, which licences were assigned to the defendants. Disputes arose as to the calculation of royalty payments, and the claimant . .
Cited – Novus Aviation Ltd v Onur Air Tasimacilik As CA 27-Feb-2009
The defendant appealed against a refusal to set aside the grant of leave to serve outside the jurisdiction granted to the claimant. Neither party conducted and business in England, and the contract was made in Switzerland, but was expressed to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Jurisdiction, Contract
Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.237269