In the context of applications for negative declarations: ‘1. There is power to grant a negative declaration in an appropriate case, the fundamental test being whether it would be useful. 2. However, careful scrutiny will be exercised not only to test the utility, or the futility, of seeking to determine the claim by means of a negative declaration in England, but also to ensure that inappropriate forum shopping is not allowed, let alone encouraged. 3. A negative declaration will not be appropriate where it is premature or hypothetical, viz where no claim has been made or threatened against the plaintiff. 4. The existence of imminent or a fortiori current foreign proceedings is always a highly relevant consideration, not only for the purpose of testing the utility of the English claim, but also so as to having in mind the need to avoid the twin dangers of forum shopping and of the vices of concurrent proceedings.’ England was the natural forum to resolve issues of construction of a policy which fell to be determined by English law, but those issues were to be dealt with first and discretely and if resolved in one way would obviate the need for any further trial.
 EWCA Civ 1727,  CLC 1062
England and Wales
Cited – Tryg Baltic International (UK) Ltd v Boston Compania De Seguros Sa and others ComC 28-May-2004
Four defendants from Argentina sought to have set aside an order for them to be served, saying the appropriate jursidiction, if there was a triable issue, would be Argentina.
Held: The agreements were to be construed according to English Law. . .
Cited – Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Plc v Retail Brand Alliance Inc QBD 24-Sep-2004
The claimant sought payment under their insurance policy for damage from interruption to their business after the terrorist attack in New York on September 11, 2001. Proceedings had also been commenced in jurisdictions in the US.
Held: This . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 18 February 2021; Ref: scu.142123