The parties were spanish companies. They were involved in proceedings against each other in Spain. The respondent had begun an action here for negligent misrepresentation against the appellant. The appellant argued that given the Spanish proceedings, the English court did not have jurisdiction because of article 22.
Held: If the actions were related then the Spanish courts were first seised and had exclusive jurisdiction. The decision as to whether actions are related to each other, is based upon broad common sense, and not on any distinction between essential and non-essential issues.
Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Clyde, Lord Saville
Times 17-Nov-1997,  UKHL 49,  AC 32,  4 All ER 929,  3 WLR 1143,  1 Lloyd’s Rep 129,  Lloyd’s Rep Bank 57,  CLC 1640,  ILPr 319, Independent 19-Nov-1997
House of Lords, Bailii
Brussels Convention 1968 Art 22, Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act of 1982 22
England and Wales
Appeal from – Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority CA 14-Nov-1996
Appeal from – Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority CA 12-Aug-1996
Cited – The owners of the cargo lately laden on board the ship ‘Tatry’ v The owners of the ship ‘Maciej Rataj’ ECJ 6-Dec-1994
ECJ On a proper construction, Article 57 of the Brussels Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments as amended means that, where a Contracting State is also a contracting party to another . .
At First Instance – Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority ComC 12-Oct-1995
cw Conflict of laws – Brussels Convention – articles 21-22 – right to invoke – independent of domicile – forum conveniens – defendant domiciled in non-Contracting State – exclusion of common law rules – same . .
See Also – Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority CA 14-Nov-1996
Cited – Casio Computer Co Ltd v Sayo and others CA 11-Apr-2001
The court was asked whether a constructive trust claim based on dishonest assistance is a matter ‘relating to tort, delict or quasi delict’ for the purpose of Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention?
Held: A constructive trust claim based upon . .
Cited – In re The Alexandros T SC 6-Nov-2013
The parties had disputed insurance claims after the foundering of the Alexandros T. After allegations of misbehaviour by the underwriters, the parties had settled the claims in a Tomlin Order. Five years later, however, the shipowners began . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 April 2021; Ref: scu.89014