The Freedom and Justice Party and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Another: Admn 5 Aug 2016

The court was asked whether members of special missions visiting the United Kingdom with the approval of the First Defendant (‘the FCO’) enjoy personal inviolability and/or immunity from criminal process pursuant to a rule of customary international law to which effect is given by the common law.

Judges:

Lloyd Jones LJ, Jay J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 2010 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, International

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.568008

Horeau and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: Admn 12 Aug 2016

Renewed application for permission to bring judicial review of a consultation exercise carried out by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office as part of its British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) policy review.

Judges:

Andrews J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 2102 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

International, Administrative

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.568836

Westland Helicopters Ltd v Arab Organisation for Industrialisation: 1995

International arbitration proceedings under a joint venture agreement had led to an award in Westland’s favour against the Organisation. The award was converted into a judgment and Westland obtained garnishee orders nisi against six London banks. Colman J was faced with a claim by an Egyptian intervener to be the same as (or a successor to) the Organisation by virtue of domestic Egyptian laws. The justification for such laws was in issue but was said by the intervener to lie in an international law principle of necessity which was in turn said to be invoked by breach by the other member states setting up the Organisation of the treaty by which it was set up. Colman J held such issues to be non-justiciable.

Citations:

[1995] QB 282

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedOccidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador CA 9-Sep-2005
The parties had arbitrated their dispute in London under a bilateral investment treaty between the US and Ecuador. The republic sought to appeal the arbitration. The applicant now appealed an order that the English High Court had jurisdiction to . .
CitedRegina (on the application of Abassi and Another) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Another CA 6-Nov-2002
A British national had been captured in Afghanistan, and was being held without remedy by US forces. His family sought an order requiring the respondent to take greater steps to secure his release or provide other assistance.
Held: Such an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, International

Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.230258

Dubai Bank Ltd v Galadari and Others (No 5): 25 Jun 1990

A British court can legitimately decide whether a foreign plaintiff company was lawfully incorporated.

Citations:

Times 25-Jun-1990

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoDubai Bank Ltd v Galadari CA 1990
A document created with a view to its being submitted to solicitors for advice does not, despite its purpose, attract privilege, even though the ‘pre-existing documents, and even documents on public records, have been selected by a solicitor for the . .

Cited by:

See AlsoDubai Bank Ltd and Another v Galadari and Others ChD 19-Feb-1992
Photocopies of documents are discoverable even if they may not be themselves good evidence of the documents of which they are copies. . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte British Council of Turkish Cypriot Associations and Another Admn 19-Mar-1998
The applicants sought judicial review of the respondent’s decision to support the application for admission to the Eurorpean Community of Cyprus.
Held: Leave was refused: ‘the independence of Cyprus since 17th August 1960 forecloses any power . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, International

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.241345

Dubai Bank Ltd v Galadari: CA 1990

A document created with a view to its being submitted to solicitors for advice does not, despite its purpose, attract privilege, even though the ‘pre-existing documents, and even documents on public records, have been selected by a solicitor for the purpose of advising his client and obtaining evidence and the solicitor has exercised skill and judgment in the selection.’

Judges:

Dillon LJ

Citations:

(1990) Ch 98

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedChadwick v Bowman CA 1886
The true question as to whether translations of a privileged document themselves attract privilege, is whether the translations ‘really’ came into existence for the purposes of the action. ‘I think that danger would follow if the privilege against . .
See AlsoDubai Bank Ltd v Galadari (No 2) CA 1990
An ex parte Mareva injunction had been obtained. It was said that there had been material non-disclosure of important facts. The plaintiff bank had been under the control of the Galadaris between 1970 and 1985, when it was taken over by the . .

Cited by:

CitedBrown and Another v Bennett and Others (No 3) ChD 17-Dec-2001
When a barrister was the subject of an application for a wasted costs order, it was proper to require him to disclose which non-privileged documents he had had sight of, provided that the request was not a way of trying to discover what was in . .
CitedSumitomo Corporation v Credit Lyonnais Rouse Limited CA 20-Jul-2001
Documents had been translated from the Japanese, for the purposes of the litigation. The claimant refused disclosure, arguing that they were privileged, and protected from disclosure, having been prepared for the court proceedings.
Held: The . .
See AlsoDubai Bank Ltd and Another v Galadari and Others ChD 19-Feb-1992
Photocopies of documents are discoverable even if they may not be themselves good evidence of the documents of which they are copies. . .
See AlsoDubai Bank Ltd v Galadari and Others (No 5) 25-Jun-1990
A British court can legitimately decide whether a foreign plaintiff company was lawfully incorporated. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Legal Professions, International

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.181214

Regina v Governor of Belmarsh Prison and Another, Ex Parte Gilligan; Regina v Governor of Exeter Prison and Another, Ex Parte Ellis: HL 1 Dec 1999

Provided there was sufficient correspondence between the offence alleged to have taken place in Ireland and a serious offence in England, it was proper to order his return to Ireland under an Irish warrant. There is no extradition treaty between the two countries, but the system was properly recorded in the 1965 Act. There was no need for identicality of the offence alleged and the comparable English offence.

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson Lord Steyn Lord Cooke of Thorndon Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Clyde

Citations:

Times 24-Nov-1999, Gazette 01-Dec-1999, [1999] UKHL 46, [1999] 3 WLR 1244, [2000] 1 All ER 113, [2001] 1 AC 84

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Backing of Warrants (Republic of Ireland) Act 1965 2(2)

Cited by:

CitedNorris v United States of America and others HL 12-Mar-2008
The detainee appealed an order for extradition to the USA, saying that the offence (price-fixing) was not one known to English common law. The USA sought his extradition under the provisions of the Sherman Act.
Held: It was not, and it would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Extradition, International

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.85278

Kinnear and Others v Falconfilms Nv and Others: QBD 27 Jan 1994

The actor Roy Kinnear died on being thrown from a horse while making a film in Spain. His widow sought damages from the fim company who in turn sought to issue a third party notice against those involved in Spain.
Held: A third party claim with a sufficient nexus may bring a main claim with Brussels Convention.

Judges:

Phillips J

Citations:

Times 01-Mar-1994, [1994] EWHC QB 1, [1996] 1 WLR 920, [1994] 3 All ER 42, [1994] ILPr 731

Links:

Bailii

International, Personal Injury, Health and Safety, Jurisdiction

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.82801

Edmunds v Simmonds: QBD 4 Oct 2000

The claimant suffered damages in a road traffic accident in Spain caused by the respondent. A Spanish court would have allowed much lower damages. Such damages should normally be assessed in accordance with the law of the country where the accident happened, but the Act allowed other applicable law to be considered. In this case, both claimant and defendant lived in England, and the majority of damage transpired in England, and the court could and would calculate damages to English standards. The issue was a procedural one, and survived the change in law.
Gartland J said: ‘Even if I had not decided the section 12 point in the claimant’s favour, I would, unless persuaded that Spanish law did not recognise any head of damage recoverable by the claimant, have decided that quantification was purely procedural and should be carried out according to English law in any event.’

Judges:

Gartland J

Citations:

Times 21-Nov-2000, [2001] 1WLR 1003

Statutes:

Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 9, 11

Cited by:

CitedHarding v Wealands CA 17-Dec-2004
The claimant sought damages here for a road traffic accident which had occurred in Australia. The defendant was working in England. The defendant argued that the law of New South Wales applied.
Held: The general rule in section 11 was not to . .
CitedRoerig v Valiant Trawlers Ltd CA 28-Jan-2002
The claimant who was Dutch, was a widow of a fisherman who had died at sea. The question on appeal was ‘in assessing damages for loss of dependency should benefits resulting from the loss be deducted from the damages?’ The claimant’s position under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80259

Case Concerning East Timor (Portugal v Australia): ICJ 18 Jul 1995

Indonesia not accepting jurisdiction of International Court of Justice not bound by it. The Court refused, in the absence of Indonesia as a party, to entertain a claim brought by Portugal challenging Australia’s right to conclude a treaty with Indonesia to delimit the continental shelf in the area of the Timor Gap. Portugal’s claim was based on the proposition that it alone remained in law the administering power in respect of East Timor, despite the Portuguese authorities’ withdrawal from East Timor in 1975 followed by Indonesia’s intervention in and control of East Timor since 1975. Portugal’s claim against Australia necessarily depended upon showing that Indonesia had acquired no legal status in respect of East Timor and that Australia and Indonesia therefore had no right to enter into the Treaty. The very subject-matter of Portugal’s claim was the lawfulness of Indonesia’s conduct. But the Court also made clear that it was ‘not necessarily prevented from adjudicating when the judgment it is asked to give might affect the legal interests of a State which is not party to the case’

Citations:

Times 18-Jul-1995

Cited by:

CitedOccidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador CA 9-Sep-2005
The parties had arbitrated their dispute in London under a bilateral investment treaty between the US and Ecuador. The republic sought to appeal the arbitration. The applicant now appealed an order that the English High Court had jurisdiction to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78931

Bunzl v Martin Bunzl International Ltd and Others: ChD 3 Aug 2000

Security for costs had been ordered against a Swiss resident claimant. Although Switzerland is not in the EU or in the EEA and therefore rules against discrimination against nationals of member states did not apply, Switzerland was still a signatory to the Brussels and Lugano Conventions for enforcement of judgments. The discretion to require security for costs was slightly wider a regards a Swiss national, but the court should still general follow the rule in Fitzgerald. Orders for security for costs against nationals of other EU member states were discriminatory.

Citations:

Times 19-Sep-2000, Gazette 03-Aug-2000

European, Costs, International

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78741

Jacob and Youngs Inc v Kent: 1921

Court of Appeals of New York. A building contract specified that the plumbing should use a particular type of piping. In fact the builder used a different type of piping. Cardozo J. stated: ‘In the circumstances of this case, we think the measure of the allowance is not the cost of replacement, which would be great, but the difference in value, which would be either nominal or nothing . . It is true that in most cases the cost of replacement is the measure . . The owner is entitled to the money which will permit him to complete, unless the cost of completion is grossly and unfairly out of proportion to the good to be obtained. When that is true, the measure is the difference in value. Specifications call, let us say, for a foundation built of granite quarried in Vermont. On the completion of the building, the owner learns that through the blunder of a subcontractor part of the foundation has been built of granite of the same quality quarried in New Hampshire. The measure of allowance is not the cost of reconstruction. ‘There may be omissions of that which could not afterwards be supplied exactly as called for by the contract without taking down the building to its foundations, and at the same time the omission may not affect the value of the building for use or otherwise, except so slightly as to be hardly appreciable.’

Judges:

Cardoza J

Citations:

(1921) 230 NY 239

Cited by:

CitedRuxley Electronics and Construction Ltd v Forsyth HL 29-Jun-1995
Damages on Construction not as Agreed
The appellant had contracted to build a swimming pool for the respondent, but, after agreeing to alter the specification to construct it to a certain depth, in fact built it to the original lesser depth, Damages had been awarded to the house owner . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Construction, International

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.526102

Winkworth v Christie, Manson and Woods Ltd: ChD 1980

The right to sue in conversion at common law is available to a person who is entitled at the time of the conversion to the immediate possession of the goods.
Slade J discussed the applicability of the law of renvoi in an international dispute about the ownership of goods.

Judges:

Slade J

Citations:

[1980] Ch 496

Cited by:

CitedIran v Berend QBD 1-Feb-2007
The Republic of Iran sought the return of a fragment of ancient Achaemenid relief in the possession of the defendant, saying that it was part of an ancient monument. The defendant said that she had bought it properly at an auction in Paris. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.442756

Ace Insurance Sa-Nv v Zurich Insurance Company and Another: QBD 6 Sep 2000

The doctrine of ‘forum non conveniens’ could be used to prevent the prosecution in the UK in respect of a matter agreed to be conducted in Texas, even though the proper applicable law was that England. The Act did not restrict the application of the doctrine in this way even for a non-contracting state, where the parties were subject to an express agreement or provision to this effect.

Citations:

Times 06-Sep-2000

Statutes:

Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982

Cited by:

Appeal FromAce Insurance Sa/Nv v Zurich Insurance Co and Another CA 2-Feb-2001
The doctrine of forum non conveniens could be used to prevent the prosecution in the UK in respect of a matter agreed to be conducted in Texas, even though the proper applicable law was that England. The Act did not operate to restrict the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.77626

In re English, Scottish and Australian Chartered Bank: 1893

Vaughan Williams J said: ‘One knows that where there is a liquidation of one concern the general principle is – ascertain what is the domicile of the company in liquidation; let the court of the country of domicile act as the principal court to govern the liquidation; and let the other courts act as ancillary, as far as they can, to the principal liquidation. But although that is so, it has always been held that the desire to assist in the main liquidation – the desire to act as ancillary to the court where the main liquidation is going on – will not ever make the court give up the forensic rules which govern the conduct of its own liquidation.'(

Judges:

Vaughan Williams J

Citations:

[1893] 3 Ch 385

Cited by:

CitedCape Plc and Others, Re Companies Act 1985 ChD 16-Jun-2006
The court was asked to sanction a scheme of arrangements, and particularly to approve a proposed scheme which itself contained the power to make amendments to the scheme.
Held: The court did have power to sanction such a proposed scheme of . .
CitedMcGrath and others v Riddell and others HL 9-Apr-2008
(Orse In Re HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd)
HIH, an Australian Insurance company, became insolvent. An order was sought for the collection and remission of it assets in England under a letter of request from the Australia Court.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Insolvency, International

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.244199

Cruz-Vargas v R J Reynolds Tobacco Company: 2003

(United States Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit) Relatives of a deceased smoker brought a negligence and strict liability suit against a tobacco company, alleging that it was responsible for his death. The action was brought in the District Court for the District of Puerto Rico. There was evidence that ‘the average consumer in Puerto Rico during the 1950’s, during the 1960’s’ was aware both of health risks, such as cancer and cardiovascular disease, associated with smoking and that ‘smoking was or could be difficult to quit’. In discussing the evidence regarding common knowledge, the Court of Appeals said: ‘This case calls for us to evaluate application of the common knowledge doctrine in the context of tobacco litigation. The doctrine stems from the principle that a manufacturer cannot be held liable under either strict liability or negligence for failure to warn of a danger commonly known to the public. See, e.g., Guevara v Dorsey Labs., Div. of Sandoz, Inc., 845 F 2d 364, 367 (1st Cir. 1988) (‘The duty to warn in general is limited to hazards not commonly known to the relevant public’); Aponte Rivera v Sears Roebuck, 44 P.R. Offic. Trans. 7, 144 D.P.R. 830 (1998) (‘[A] manufacturer need not warn of a hazard if the average consumer ordinarily has knowledge of the dangers of the product.’). […]
A products liability plaintiff alleging failure to warn must prove
‘(1) the manufacturer knew, or should have known of the risk inherent in the product; (2) there were no warnings or instructions, or those provided were inadequate; (3) the absence of warnings made the product inherently dangerous; (4) the absence of adequate warnings or instructions was the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injury.’
Aponte Rivera, 44 P.R. Offic. Trans. at 6. Under the common knowledge doctrine, however, a defendant neither breaches a duty nor causes the product to be inherently dangerous when the allegedly omitted warning concerns a danger of which the public is well aware. […]
The crux of appellants’ entreaty on appeal is that neither the strict liability nor the negligence claim requires any affirmative showing, and thus the burden rested entirely on Reynolds. Whether or not this is a correct view of the law, after searching the record we have found no evidence which supports appellants’ allegations that there was a lack of common knowledge and thus we are compelled to find that Reynolds met its burden in any event.’
(5) In Roysdon v R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company 849 F.2d 230 (6th Cir. 1988), a smoker and his wife brought an action against a tobacco manufacturer to recover for disease allegedly caused by smoking. The United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, inter alia affirmed the dismissal by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee of the plaintiffs’ failure to warn claim. At p.236, para.10, the Court of Appeals said:
‘[T]he district court took judicial notice that ‘tobacco has been used for over 400 years and that its characteristics have also been fully explored. Knowledge that cigarette smoking is harmful to health is widespread and can be considered part of the common knowledge of the community.’
Roysdon, 623 F.Supp. at 1192. Remembering that this action was limited to the ten years preceding the filing of this complaint [on 5 July 1984], we think this approach was appropriate. The extensive information regarding the risks of smoking available to the public during that time precluded the existence of a jury question as to whether cigarettes are unreasonably dangerous. We find that whether there was knowledge regarding Mr Roysdon’s specific medical problem is irrelevant in light of the serious nature of the other diseases known at that time to be caused by cigarette smoking.’

Citations:

[2003] 348 F3d 271 (1st Cir.2003)

Cited by:

CitedMcTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd OHCS 31-May-2005
The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this.
Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, International

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.226222

Curtin v Barton: 1893

(New York) ‘When a court with competent jurisdiction is duly established, a suitor who resorts to it for the administration of justice and the protection of private rights should not be defeated or embarrassed by questions relating to the title of the judge who presides in the court, to his office.’

Citations:

(1893) 139 NY 505

Cited by:

CitedFawdry and Co (A Firm) v Murfitt CA 14-May-2002
The judge at first instance who was ticketed to sit as a judge in the Technology and Construction Court, had been asked to sit as a judge of the High Court to take this case. The appellant said she was acting outside her powers.
Held: The . .
CitedBaldock v Webster and Others CA 21-Dec-2004
The claimant alleged negligence against his solicitors in having failed to challenge an order made ultra vires by a county court judge.
Held: The common law doctrine of de facto jurisdiction validated the decision of the judge. The recorder . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Litigation Practice

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.221428

Simon Engineering Plc and Another v Butte Mining and Another (No 2): ComC 27 Feb 1995

Procedure – Interlocutory injunction – anti-suit injunction – injunction to prevent appeal in the US from being pursued – foreign court pronounced itself to be without jurisdiction – natural forum – foreign proceedings oppressive

Judges:

Rix J

Citations:

[1996] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 91

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, International

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.182569

Prosecutor v Furundzija: ICT 10 Dec 1998

The status of the prohibition on State torture as a rule of jus cogens has the consequence that at the inter-State level, any legislative, administrative or judicial act authorising torture is illegitimate. Furthermore, the prohibition on State torture imposes obligations owed by States erga omnes, to all other States which have a corresponding right and interest in compliance.
(International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia The Hague) The jus cogens character of the prohibition on torture means that it enjoys a higher rank in the international hierarchy than treaty law and even ‘ordinary’ customary rules with the consequence that no derogation from the rule by States can be permitted, whether through international treaties or local or special customs or even general customary rules not endowed with the same normative force. The prohibition of torture is an absolute value from which nobody must deviate.
‘Furthermore, the prohibition of torture imposes upon states obligations erga omnes, that is, obligations owed towards all the other members of the international community, each of which then has a correlative right. In addition, the violation of such an obligation simultaneously constitutes a breach of the correlative right of all members of the international community and gives rise to a claim for compliance accruing to each and every member, which then has the right to insist on fulfilment of the obligation or in any case to call for the breach to be discontinued.’

Citations:

Case No. IT – 95- 17/T 10, (1998) 38 ILM 317

Links:

ICT

Cited by:

CitedMohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 1) Admn 21-Aug-2008
The claimant had been detained by the US in Guantanamo Bay suspected of terrorist involvement. He sought to support his defence documents from the respondent which showed that the evidence to be relied on in the US courts had been obtained by . .
See AlsoProsecutor v Furundzija 1-Apr-1999
(International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia) The court described the main features of the law against torture: ‘There exists today universal revulsion against torture: as a USA Court put it in Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, ‘the torturer . .
CitedYoussef v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs SC 27-Jan-2016
An Egyptian national, had lived here since 1994. He challenged a decision by the Secretary of State,as a member of the committee of the United Nations Security Council, known as the Resolution 1267 Committee or Sanctions Committee. The committee . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Human Rights

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.272824

Societe D’Informatique Service Realisation Org v Ampersand Software Bv: CA 29 Sep 1993

Foreign judgment registered here despite claim that it was obtained by fraud.

Citations:

Gazette 29-Sep-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Reference fromSociete D’Informatique Service Realisation Organisation v Ampersand Software Bv ECJ 25-Sep-1995
Court’s refusal to stay enforcement of foreign court order cannot be appealed against. Different jurisdictions not to be used to get advantage on enforcement. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.89366

Society of Lloyd’s v White and others: QBD 14 Apr 2000

A court in England could issue an injunction preventing parties continuing an action in Australia even though the court there had accepted jurisdiction. The contract contained an exclusive jurisdiction clause for dispute to be settled here, and the Australian court did not appear to have considered relevant English court decisions. Such an action must be speedy, and made with respect for the foreign court.

Citations:

Times 14-Apr-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction, International

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.89382

Skrine and Co (a Firm) and others v Euromoney Publications plc and others: QBD 10 Nov 2000

The court was asked to strike out parts of a defemation pleading alleging that (i) the Malaysian Prime Minister had acted in a manner intended and/or calculated to interfere with the independent judiciary; (ii) Malaysian judges applied the law of defamation to penalise dissent and stifle freedom of expression; and (iii) the claimants’ insurers only paid the original plaintiffs ‘exorbitant sums by way of ostensible damages and costs because they apprehended that the claimants would not have received a fair trial at the hands of Malaysia’s internationally discredited legal system.’
Held: An English court should not be asked to judge the propriety of the actions of the judiciary of a friendly foreign state. This would put such friendly relations at risk and an English judge could have no way of making such a judgment. It was not a breach of an applicant’s civil rights to enforce a properly made contribution order made there against a citizen here, since under the Act only an award which was just and equitable in all the circumstances could be made. The defence of fair comment could still be tried fairly.

Judges:

Morland J

Citations:

Times 10-Nov-2000, Gazette 23-Nov-2000, [2001] EMLR 16

Statutes:

Civil Liability (Contributions) Act 1978

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedButtes Oil and Gas Co v Hammer (No 3) HL 1982
The House considered a dispute between two Us oil companies about the right to exploit an oil field in the Gulf. Each claimed to have a concession granted by the ruler of a Gulf state. Each state claimed that the oil field was within its territorial . .

Cited by:

CitedAl-Koronky and Another v Time-Life Entertainment Group Ltd and Another CA 28-Jul-2006
The claimants sought damages after publication of articles alleging severe mistreatment of a servant. One defendant had settled and apologised, but the defendant publisher and author had persisted with the allegation. The claimants who lived in . .
CitedKorea National Insurance Company v Allianz Global Corporate and Specialty Ag ComC 18-Nov-2008
The claimant sought to enforce a judgment for payment of a sum under a policy of insurance. The defendant sought to refuse saying that the policy had been instigated by a fraud perpetrated by the state of North Korea, and or that the judicial system . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Human Rights, Defamation

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.89300

Emesa Sugar (Free Zone) Nv v Aruba (No 2) Case C-17/98): ECJ 29 Feb 2000

A national court had jurisdiction to make an order against a Non-EC body in order to prevent an imminent infringement of community law, provided that the court had proper and serious doubts about the implementation of the community law, the matter was urgent, and the national court made proper allowance for the Community’s interests.

Citations:

Times 29-Feb-2000

Jurisdiction:

European

International

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.80309

As Latvijas Krajbanka v Antonov: ComC 27 May 2016

The bank claimed undr Latvian Law. The defendant though aware of proceedings had failed to comply with court for dicovery, and had not attended the trial. He had been found to have exaggerated the value of a yacht given in security for a loan.
Held: The application had been dishonest and in reckless disregard of the fact that the transaction was not in the interests of the Bank. Similar findings applied to seven other very substantial advances totalling over US$30 million.

Judges:

Leggatt J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1262 (Comm), 2014 FOLIO 861 and 761

Links:

Bailii, Judiciary

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Banking, International

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.564921

Whitney v California: 1927

(United States) Brandeis J considered that the risk of mis-reporting of court proceedings was in fact a reason for more court reporting: ‘If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.’

Judges:

Brandeis J

Citations:

(1927) 274 US 357

Jurisdiction:

United States

Cited by:

CitedNorfolk County Council v Webster and others FD 1-Nov-2006
The claimants wished to claim that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice in the way the Council had dealt with care proceedings. They sought that the proceedings should be reported without the children being identified.
Held: A judge . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Media

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.245944

Masters and Others v Leaver: CA 2 Sep 1999

A judgment obtained by default against a bankrupt in a foreign jurisdiction, was not sufficient evidence of itself, to establish that the debt which it proved had been obtained or created by fraud, or by a fraud to which they were a party. The party had been debarred from defending himself, and a finding on those terms could not mean that the debt should survive a bankruptcy here.

Citations:

Gazette 02-Sep-1999, Times 05-Aug-1999

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 281 (3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insolvency, International

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.83466

In Re K (A Minor) (Removal From Jurisdiction: Practice): CA 2 Sep 1999

Hearings involving the temporary removal of a child to a non-Convention country needed full preparation, and must be heard by a Family Division judge. The magnitude of the risks and the irretrievable consequences required this. Care should be taken to implement the fullest safeguards, and if necessary expert evidence on the practicality of enforcing such safeguards in that country in the case of breach.

Citations:

Gazette 02-Sep-1999

Statutes:

Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, International

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.81971

England v Smith: CA 8 Dec 1999

A liquidator of an Australian company sought damages from a ‘world-wide’ company Arthur Andersen’ and sought in particular to examine a partner in the UK. Examination was at first refused since an English court would not make a similar order. That erred in taking a restrictive view of English insolvency practice. ‘Insolvency Law’ did not exclude other considerations such as the need for comity as shown in the section. Australian law applied to the examination of an accountant connected with insolvent Australian company.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Dec-1999, [2001] Ch 419

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 236

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMcGrath and Honey v McMahon and Others, Re HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd and others CA 9-Jun-2006
The insurance company was to be wound up. It operated internationally but was registered in Australia. The Australian liquidator now sought an order for the transfer of assets held here to Australia.
Held: It was inevitable that cross border . .
CitedMcGrath and others v Riddell and others HL 9-Apr-2008
(Orse In Re HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd)
HIH, an Australian Insurance company, became insolvent. An order was sought for the collection and remission of it assets in England under a letter of request from the Australia Court.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, International

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.80333

Dubai Islamic Bank Pjsc v Paymentech Merchant Services Inc: QBD 24 Nov 2000

The place of arbitration, the juridical seat, was necessarily and inherently established at the time when an arbitration began, and could not subsequently be moved, save with the consent of the parties. Until the point where the arbitration commenced, the juridical seat could be established as required under the Act by looking at all the circumstances, but to allow it to be reviewed and changed after commencement would allow it to become peripatetic.

Citations:

Gazette 07-Dec-2000, Times 24-Nov-2000

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1996 67 68 69

Arbitration, International

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.80152

F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd v Empagran SA: 14 Jun 2004

United States Supreme Court – the Supreme Court reflected on matters of comity in relation to US competition law in the Sherman Act, saying that a state has jurisdiction to prescribe law with respect to ‘(a) conduct that, wholly or in substantial part, takes place within its territory; (b) the status of persons, or interests in things, present within its territory; (c) conduct outside its territory that has or is intended to have substantial effect within its territory’.
Breyer JA said: ‘this court ordinarily construes ambiguous statutes to avoid unreasonable interference with the sovereign authority of other nations. . . This rule of construction reflects principles of customary international law – law that (we must assume) Congress ordinarily seeks to follow. See Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law of the United States sections 403(1), 403(2) (1986) (hereinafter Restatement) (limiting the unreasonable exercise of prescriptive jurisdiction with respect to a person or activity having connections with another state); Murray v Schooner Charming Betsy, 2 Cranch 64, 118 (1804) (‘[A]n act of Congress ought never to be construed to violate the law of nations if any other possible construction remains’);
This rule of statutory construction cautions courts to assume that legislators take account of the legitimate sovereign interests of other nations when they write American laws. It thereby helps the potentially conflicting laws of different nations work together in harmony-a harmony particularly needed in today’s highly interdependent commercial world.
No one denies that America’s antitrust laws, when applied to foreign conduct, can interfere with a foreign nation’s ability independently to regulate its own commercial affairs. But our courts have long held that application of our antitrust laws to foreign anticompetitive conduct is nonetheless reasonable, and hence consistent with principles of prescriptive comity, insofar as they reflect a legislative effort to redress domestic antitrust injury that foreign anticompetitive conduct has caused.
But why is it reasonable to apply those laws to foreign conduct insofar as that conduct causes independent foreign harm and that foreign harm alone gives rise to the plaintiff’s claim? Like the former case, application of those laws creates a serious risk of interference with a foreign nation’s ability independently to regulate its own commercial affairs. But, unlike the former case, the justification for that interference seems insubstantial. See Restatement section 403(2) (determining reasonableness on basis of such factors as connections with regulating nation, harm to that nation’s interests, extent to which other nations regulate, and the potential for conflict). Why should American law supplant, for example, Canada’s or Great Britain’s or Japan’s own determination about how best to protect Canadian or British or Japanese customers from anticompetitive conduct engaged in significant part by Canadian or British or Japanese or other foreign companies?’

Citations:

159 L Ed 2d 226, [2004] USSC 238, 542 US 155, 124 SCt 2359

Links:

Worldlii

Jurisdiction:

United States

Cited by:

CitedThe United States of America v Nolan SC 21-Oct-2015
Mrs Nolan had been employed at a US airbase. When it closed, and she was made redundant, she complained that the appellant had not consulted properly on the redundancies. The US denied that it had responsibility to consult, and now appealed.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.591915

Mozes v Mozes: 9 Jan 2001

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Judges:

KOZINSKI and THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and ILLSTON, District Judge

Citations:

[2001] USCA9 16, 239 F.3d 1067 (9th Cir. 2001)

Links:

Worldlii

Statutes:

Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction

Jurisdiction:

United States

Cited by:

CitedA v A and another (Children) (Children: Habitual Residence) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening) SC 9-Sep-2013
Acquisition of Habitual Residence
Habitual residence can in principle be lost and another habitual residence acquired on the same day.
Held: The provisions giving the courts of a member state jurisdiction also apply where there is an alternative jurisdiction in a non-member . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, International

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.588979

Attorney-General for the United Kingdom v Heinemann Publishers Australia Pty Ltd: 1988

(High Court of Australia) The A-G sought to prevent publication in Australia of the book Spycatcher, saying that it had been written by a former member of the British intelligence service and that it was derived from confidential material.
Held: The court should not enforce foreign public laws, in so much as it would not allow enforcement outside the territory of the foreign sovereign of claims based on or related to the exercise of foreign governmental power. Though it was difficult to identify the foreign laws or rights which fell within the general principle, the majority suggested that, rather than refer to ‘public laws’, it would be more apt to refer to ‘public interests’ or ‘governmental interests’ that is to claims enforcing the interests of a foreign sovereign which arise from the exercise of certain powers peculiar to government. This claim for relief ‘arises out of, and is secured by, an exercise of a prerogative of the Crown, that exercise being the maintenance of the national security. Therefore the right or interest asserted in the proceedings is to be classified as a governmental interest. As such, the action falls within the rule of international law which renders the claim unenforceable’.

Citations:

(1988) 165 CLR 30

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

CitedMbasogo, President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Logo Ltd and others CA 23-Oct-2006
Foreign Public Law Not Enforceable Here
The claimant alleged a conspiracy by the defendants for his overthrow by means of a private coup d’etat. The defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction. The claimants appealed dismissal of their claim to damages.
Held: The claims were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.245577

Brown v Superior Court: 1988

(Supreme Court of California) The court considered the ‘market share doctrine’ for apportioning liability between tortfeasors: ‘In creating the market share doctrine, this court attempted to fashion a remedy for persons injured by a drug taken by their mothers a generation ago, making identification of the manufacturer impossible in many cases. We realised that in order to provide relief for an injured DES daughter faced with this dilemma, we would have to allow recovery of damages against some defendants which may not have manufactured the drug that caused the damage. . . Each defendant would be held liable for the proportion of the judgment represented by its market share, and its overall liability for injuries caused by DES would approximate the injuries caused by the DES it manufactured. A DES manufacturer found liable under this approach would not be held responsible for injuries caused by another producer of the drug. The opinion acknowledged that only an approximation of a manufacturer’s liability could be achieved by this procedure, but underlying our holding was a recognition that such a result was preferable to denying recover altogether to plaintiffs injured by DES.
It is apparent that the imposition of joint liability on defendants in a market share action would be inconsistent with this rationale. Any defendant could be held responsible for the entire judgment even though its market share may have been comparatively insignificant. Liability would in the first instance be measured not by the likelihood of responsibility for the plaintiff’s injuries but by the financial ability of a defendant to undertake payment of the entire judgment or a large portion of it.’

Citations:

(1988) 751 P 2d 470

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBarker v Corus (UK) Plc HL 3-May-2006
The claimants sought damages after contracting meselothemia working for the defendants. The defendants argued that the claimants had possibly contracted the disease at any one or more different places. The Fairchild case set up an exception to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Damages

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.241494

Naviera Maritima Peruana SA v Compania Internacional de Seguros de Peru: CA 1988

Unless agreed otherwise, the law of the ‘seat’ of the arbitration will govern its conduct. The court overruled a first instance decision that an arbitration was to be conducted in Lima as the agreed forum (and therefore seat), but with English law as the lex fori. LJ Kerr referred to the complexities and inconveniences which such an arrangement would cause, including the impossibility or at best difficulty of the English Court exercising jurisdiction over an arbitration proceeding in Peru.

Judges:

Kerr LJ

Citations:

[1988] 1 Lloyds Rep 1116

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHalpern and Another v Halpern and others ComC 24-Mar-2006
The deceased parents, being orthodox Jews, had first made standard wills and then made provision accoding to Jewish law. A dispute after the second death was referred to a Beth Din arbitration. After an initial resolution, various distributions were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, International

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.239600

Emperor of Austria v Day and Kossuth: 1861

The defendants had printed banknotes in London. Kossuth intended to use the notes in Hungary after overthrowing the Emperor of Austria by revolution. The Emperor obtained an injunction restraining the defendants from continuing to manufacture them. The defendants appealed.
Held: The injunction was upheld. One of the defences advanced was that the injunction should be refused because the proceedings were brought to protect the Emperor’s political power and prerogatives. Lord Campbell LC:’if the suit were instituted merely to support his political power and prerogatives’ he would have denied the Emperor the right to maintain the suit.
Lord Justice Turner agreed and noted that the bill put the plaintiff’s case on three grounds: (i) violation of the rights and prerogative of the plaintiff as King of Hungary ‘by promotion of revolution and disorder and otherwise’; (ii) injury to the State of Hungary by the introduction of a spurious circulation into that kingdom; and (iii) injury to the subjects of the plaintiff by the same cause. There was no doubt that the court did not have jurisdiction to interfere on the grounds that the notes were intended to be used for the purpose of promoting revolution and disorder. He rejected the second ground saying the right of coining and issuing paper money is the prerogative of a sovereign: ‘so far, therefore, as this bill is founded upon the prerogative rights of the Plaintiff, or upon the political rights of his subjects’ the injunction should be refused: ‘the prerogative rights of sovereigns seem to me, as at present advised, to stand very much upon the same footing as acts of State and matters of that description, with which the municipal courts of this country do not and cannot interfere’.
But the court upheld the injunction on the third ground on which the bill was based. Lord Campbell was of the opinion that ‘if the acts meditated by the defendants and forbidden by this injunction were actually done, a pecuniary loss would be sustained by the plaintiff and by all his subjects, holders of the existing currency’. The court has jurisdiction to protect property from an act which, if completed, would give a right of action. Lord Justice Turner said that the third ground on which the bill was based alleged a case of injury to the subjects of the kingdom, ‘an injury not to the political but to the private rights of the plaintiff’s subjects’. He concluded: ‘I agree that the jurisdiction of this Court in a case of this nature rests upon injury to property actual or prospective, and that this Court has no jurisdiction to prevent the commission of acts which are merely criminal or merely illegal, and do not affect any rights of property, but I think there are here rights of property quite sufficient to found jurisdiction in this Court.’

Judges:

Lord Campbell LC, Lord Justice Turner

Citations:

(1861) 2 Giff 628

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Jones (Margaret), Regina v Milling and others HL 29-Mar-2006
Domestic Offence requires Domestic Defence
Each defendant sought to raise by way of defence of their otherwise criminal actions, the fact that they were attempting to prevent the commission by the government of the crime of waging an aggressive war in Iraq, and that their acts were . .
CitedKingdom of Spain v Christie, Manson and Woods Ltd 1986
The court questioned the basis of the cause of action asserted in Austria -v- Day. . .
CitedRCA Corporation v Pollard CA 1982
The illegal activities of bootleggers who had made unauthorised recordings of concerts, diminished the profitability of contracts granting to the plaintiffs the exclusive right to exploit recordings by Elvis Presley.
Held: The defendant’s . .
CitedMbasogo, President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Logo Ltd and others CA 23-Oct-2006
Foreign Public Law Not Enforceable Here
The claimant alleged a conspiracy by the defendants for his overthrow by means of a private coup d’etat. The defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction. The claimants appealed dismissal of their claim to damages.
Held: The claims were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, International

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.239959

Philip Alexander Securities and Futures Ltd v Bamberger and Others: ComC 8 May 1996

ComC Consumer contracts – arbitration provision – Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988 – exceptions – sections 2(b), 4 : European Union – Consumer contracts – arbitration provision – Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988 – exceptions – section 2(a) – distinction between domestic and non-domestic consumers – discrimination – Article 6 EC – freedom to provide services – restriction – Article 59 EC – breach of European law – disapplication of section 2(a) : Consumer contracts – arbitration provision – ruling on application of arbitration provision by courts of Contracting State – Brussels Convention article 1(4) – exclusion of arbitration – meaning – Brussels Convention article 27(4), 28

Judges:

Waller J

Citations:

Independent 08-Jul-1996

Statutes:

Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from (Affirmed)Philip Alexander Securities and Futures Ltd v Bamberger and Others CA 22-Jul-1996
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, International, Consumer

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186006

HKSAR v Li Kwok Cheung George: 5 Jun 2014

Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal The court considered the wording of a Hong Kong money laundering ordinance.
Held: Ribeiro and Fok PJJ said in their joint judgment with which the other members of the Court of Final Appeal agreed, saying: ‘It is one thing to criminalise dealing with funds where the dealer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe that they are the proceeds of crime, it is quite a different matter to stigmatise as a money launderer, a lender dealing with its own ‘clean’ funds because of what the borrower does or intends to do with them.’

Judges:

Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ, Mr Justice Tang PJ,, Mr Justice Fok PJ, Mr Justice Bokhary NPJ,, Lord Collins of Mapesbury NPJ

Citations:

[2014] HKCFA 48, [2014] 4 HKC 101

Links:

HKLII, Hklii, Hklii Summary

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGH, Regina v SC 22-Apr-2015
Appeal against conviction for entering into an arrangement for the retention of criminal funds. The defendant said that at the time of the arrangement there were not yet any criminal funds in existence. A had set up websites intending to con . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, International

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.565398

Regazzoni v KC Sethia (1994) Ltd: CA 1956

The rule against enforcing foreign political laws did not require it to enforce a contract that violated Indian laws against export to South Africa. The court permitted recognition but not enforcement of foreign revenue laws.
Denning LJ said: ‘if two people knowingly agree together to break the laws of a friendly country or to procure someone else to break them or to assist in the doing of it, then they cannot ask this court to give its aid to the enforcement of their agreement.’

Judges:

Parker, Denning LJJ

Citations:

[1956] 2 QB 490, [1956] 2 All ER 487

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFielding and Platt Ltd v Selim Najjar CA 17-Jan-1969
The plaintiff company had contracted to make and export to the defendant an aluminium extrusion press. The defendant re-assured the plaintiff that it would be lawful for him to import the plant, but asked that the plant be described falsely on the . .
fromRegazzoni v Sethia HL 1957
The House considered a mutual intention of both parties to perform a contract, which was not illegal on its face, but in a manner which was contrary to the law of the place where it was to be performed.
Held: Lord Reid said: ‘To my mind, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, International

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.464683

Brook v Brook: 17 Apr 1858

The law of the country in which a marriage is solemnised cannot give validity to a marriage prohibited by the laws of the country of the domicile and allegiance of the contracting parties.
Therefore, a marriage celebrated during a temporary residence in Denmark between an English widower and the sister of his deceased wife, being null and void by the stat. 5 and 6 Wtn. 4, is not valid, although by the law of Denmark marriages are permitted between persons so related by affinity.
The principle of lex loci contractus examined as to various qualifications and exceptions,

Citations:

[1858] EngR 545, (1857-1858) 3 Sm and G 481, (1858) 65 ER 746

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, International

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.289016

Peter Buchanan Limited and Macharg v McVey: 1954

(Supreme Court of Ireland) The plaintiff was a company registered in Scotland put into compulsory liquidation by the revenue under a substantial claim for excess profits tax and income tax. The liquidator was really a nominee of the revenue. The defendant director had realised all the company’s assets and having paid all the debts save the revenue, had the balance transferred to himself to his credit with an Irish bank. He moved to Ireland. The action appeared to seek to recover the balance from the defendant at the instance of the company directed by the liquidator.
Held: The director’s actions were dishonestly intended to defeat the claim of the revenue in Scotland as a creditor. However though the action was in form an action by the company to recover these assets, it was found ‘For the purpose of this case it is sufficient to say that when it appears to the court that the whole object of the suit is to collect tax for a foreign revenue, and that this will be the sole result of a decision in favour of the plaintiff, then a court is entitled to reject the claim by refusing jurisdiction’ and as an attempt to enforce indirectly a claim to tax by the revenue authorities of another State, the action was dismissed.

Judges:

Kingsmill Moore J

Citations:

[1955] AC 516, [1954] IR 89

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

ApprovedGovernment of India v Taylor HL 1955
The Government of India sought to prove in the voluntary liquidation of a company registered in the United Kingdom but trading in India for a sum due in respect of Indian income tax, including capital gains tax, which arose on the sale of the . .
ApprovedIn re State of Norway’s application (Nos 1 and 2) HL 1989
The House considered an application by a foreign state seeking assistance in obtaining evidence here to be used in enforcing its own revenue laws at home.
Held: Rule 3 of the Convention encapsulated a ‘fundamental rule of English Law’, but did . .
FollowedQRS 1 APS and others v Frandsen CA 21-May-1999
The appellants were all Danish companies put into liquidation for asset stripping in contravention of Danish law. The respondent was resident in the UK and had owned them. The Danish tax authorities issued tax demands and the liquidators now sought . .
CitedWilliams and Humbert Ltd v W and H Trade Marks (Jersey) Ltd HL 1986
There had been an expropriation by Spanish decrees of shares in a Spanish company whose English subsidiary had rights in trade marks which it had sold to a Jersey company. The Spanish and English companies sought certain relief in relation to the . .
CitedHolland v Lampen-Wolfe HL 20-Jul-2000
The US established a base at Menwith Hill in Yorkshire, and provided educational services through its staff to staff families. The claimant a teacher employed at the base alleged that a report on her was defamatory. The defendant relied on state . .
CitedHill (As Trustee In Bankruptcy of Nurkowski) v Spread Trustee Company Ltd and Another CA 12-May-2006
The defendants sought relief for transactions entered into at an undervalue. The bankrupt had entered into charges and an assignment of a loan account in their favour before his bankruptcy, and the trustee had obtained an order for them to be set . .
CitedMbasogo, President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Logo Ltd and others CA 23-Oct-2006
Foreign Public Law Not Enforceable Here
The claimant alleged a conspiracy by the defendants for his overthrow by means of a private coup d’etat. The defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction. The claimants appealed dismissal of their claim to damages.
Held: The claims were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Taxes Management

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.225455

Herbage v Meese: 1990

(US) A claim was brought against British police officers and prosecuting counsel for knowingly and falsely stating, in the context of extradition proceedings against the claimant, that the United States had made a valid ‘provisional request’ for his extradition.
Held: The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 does not discuss the liability or role of natural persons, whether governmental officials or private persons’, the sovereign immunity which it grants was held to extend to such persons: ‘This is a logical approach, for a government does not act but through its agents’. ‘The standard for determining whether immunity is warranted does not depend on the identity of the person or entity so much as the nature of the act for which the person or entity is claiming immunity’. Since the activity complained of was governmental in nature and performed by officials of that government, the Court had no jurisdiction ‘over a foreign sovereign’ and that the FSIA was ‘absolute in this regard, no matter how heinous the alleged illegalities’.

Citations:

(1990) 747 F Supp 60

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

AppliedJaffe v Miller 1993
(Ontario Court of Appeal) Florida state officials were sued for alleged conspiracy maliciously to prosecute and to kidnap and detain the claimant, in order to blackmail him into giving up a civil suit.
Held: It is the character of the act, . .
CitedJones v Ministry of Interior Al-Mamlaka Al-Arabiya As Saudiya Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) and Another CA 28-Oct-2004
The claimants sought damages alleging torture by the respondent whilst held in custody in Saudi Arabia.
Held: Although the state enjoyed freedom from action, where the acts were ones of torture, and action could proceed against state officials . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.219449

Church of Scientology: 1978

(German Supreme Court) A claim to immunity by the defendant (the ‘Head of New Scotland Yard’) was not ‘derived from his person’, but was based on the fact that the act on which the claimant sued was ‘a sovereign act of State which can only be attributed to the British State and not to him or any other official acting on behalf of that State, because the State is always considered the actor when one of its functionaries performs acts which are incumbent on it’. The acts of the defendant, as the expressly appointed agent of the United Kingdom for the purpose of performance of a treaty between the United Kingdom and Germany, ‘cannot be attributed as private activities to the person authorised to perform them in any given case’ and that ‘any attempt to subject State conduct to German jurisdiction by targeting the foreign agent performing the act would undermine the absolute immunity of sovereign States in respect of sovereign activity’.

Citations:

(1978) 65 ILR 193

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedJones v Ministry of Interior Al-Mamlaka Al-Arabiya As Saudiya Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) and Another CA 28-Oct-2004
The claimants sought damages alleging torture by the respondent whilst held in custody in Saudi Arabia.
Held: Although the state enjoyed freedom from action, where the acts were ones of torture, and action could proceed against state officials . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.219448

Sberbank of Russia v Council: ECFI 13 Sep 2018

Restrictive Measures Adopted In View of Russia’S Actions Destabilising The Situation In Ukraine – Judgment
Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine – Applicant’s name included and retained in the list of entities to which the restrictive measures apply – Error of assessment – Obligation to state reasons – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Right to property – Right to carry on an economic activity

Citations:

T-732/14, [2018] EUECJ T-732/14, ECLI:EU:T:2018:541

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

International, Banking

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.622590

Micula and Others v Romania: CA 27 Jul 2018

Enforcement of an arbitration award given in accordance with the procedure laid down in the International Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 1801

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration, International

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620470

Klyuyev v Council: ECFI 11 Jul 2018

Restrictive Measures Taken In View of The Situation In Ukraine – Freezing of Funds – List of Persons – Judgment – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Retention of the applicant’s name on the list – Legal basis – Manifest error of assessment – Rights of defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Right to property – Right to reputation – Plea of illegality

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2018:433, T-240/16, [2018] EUECJ T-240/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking, International

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620026

Mahamdia v People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria (Judicial Cooperation In Civil Matters): ECJ 19 Jul 2012

Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment – Contract with an embassy of a third State – Immunity of the employing State – Concept of branch, agency or other establishment within the meaning of Article 18(2) – Compatibility with Article 21 of an agreement conferring jurisdiction on the courts of the third State

Citations:

[2012] EUECJ C-154/11, [2013] ICR 1, [2012] ILPr 41, [2013] CEC 452, [2012] WLR(D) 218, [2014] All ER (EC) 96, ECLI:EU:C:2012:491, C-154/11

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

OpinionMahamdia v People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria (Judicial Cooperation In Civil Matters) ECJ 24-May-2012
Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Jurisdiction – State immunity from jurisdiction – Jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment – Dispute concerning the validity of the dismissal of the applicant who had been employed as a driver in a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, International

Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616744

Azarov v Council: ECFI 26 Apr 2018

Judgment – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies to which the freezing of funds and economic resources applies – Maintenance of the name of the applicant on the list – Rights of the defense – Principle of good administration – Misuse of powers – Right of property – Right to freedom of enterprise – Manifest error of assessment

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2018:232, [2018] EUECJ T-190/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

International

Updated: 14 April 2022; Ref: scu.609299

River East Supplies Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Crown Court At Nottingham: Admn 28 Jul 2017

Privilege against self incrimination and application for production order by foreign state

Judges:

Simon LJ, Sir Kenneth Parker

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1942 (Admin), [2017] WLR(D) 528, [2017] 2 Cr App R 27, [2017] 4 WLR 135, [2017] Lloyd’s Rep FC 482

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedSaunders v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Dec-1996
(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence, International

Updated: 13 April 2022; Ref: scu.591665

Staywell Hospitality Group Pty Ltd v Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide Inc: 29 Nov 2013

(Singapore – Court of Appeal) The ‘hard-line’ approach to goodwill is the law in Singapore was continued. meaning that a foreign trader who does not conduct any business activity in Singapore will generally not be able to maintain an action in passing off in Singapore. After reviewing the authorities in the UK, Australia and Hong Kong, the Court declined to soften the ‘hard-line’ approach, although it indicated that it might be prepared to do so in some respects if and when the right case came before the court. This approach this ‘draws a clear distinction between goodwill and reputation’.

Judges:

Sundaresh Menon CJ

Citations:

[2014] 1 SLR 911, [2013] SGCA 65

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Cited by:

CitedStarbucks (HK) Ltd and Another v British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc and Others SC 13-May-2015
The court was asked whether, as the appellants contended, a claimant who is seeking to maintain an action in passing off need only establish a reputation among a significant section of the public within the jurisdiction, or whether, as the courts . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Intellectual Property

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.566018

Hospital Products Ltd v United States Surgical Corporation: 25 Oct 1984

High Court of Australia – A solicitor’s duty of loyalty to his client’s interest, and his duty to respect his client’s confidences, have their roots in the fiduciary nature of the solicitor-client relationship, but may have to be moulded and informed by the terms of the contractual relationship.
Mason J said:’That contractual and fiduciary relationships may co-exist between the same parties has never been doubted. Indeed, the existence of a basic contractual relationship has in many situations provided a foundation for the erection of a fiduciary relationship. In these situations it is the contractual foundation which is all important because it is the contract that regulates the basic rights and liabilities of the parties. The fiduciary relationship, if it is to exist at all, must accommodate itself to the terms of the contract so that it is consistent with, and conforms to them. The fiduciary relationship cannot be superimposed upon the contract in such a way as to alter the operation which the contract was intended to have according to its construction.’
Mason J explained: ‘But entitlement to act in one’s own interests is not an answer to the existence of a fiduciary relationship, if there be an obligation to act in the interests of another. It is that obligation which is the foundation of the fiduciary relationship, even if it be subject to qualifications including the qualification that in some respects the fiduciary is entitled to act by reference to his own interests. The fiduciary duty must then accommodate itself to the relationship between the parties created by their contractual arrangements. And entitlement under the contract to act in a relevant matter solely by reference to one’s own interests will constitute an answer to an alleged breach of the fiduciary duty. The difficulty of deciding under the contract when the fiduciary is entitled to act in his own interests is not in itself a reason for rejecting the existence of a fiduciary relationship, though it may be an element in arriving at the conclusion that the person asserting the relationship has not established that there is any obligation to act in the interests of another.’

Judges:

Mason J

Citations:

(1984) 156 CLR 41, (1984) 55 ALR 417, (1984) 58 ALJR 587, 4 IPR 291, [1984] HCA 64

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

ApprovedKelly v Cooper and Another PC 25-Nov-1992
There was a dispute between a client and an estate agent in Bermuda. The client sued the estate agent for damages for breach of duty in failing to disclose material information to him and for putting himself in a position where his duty and his . .
CitedHilton v Barker Booth and Eastwood HL 3-Feb-2005
The claimant had instructed the defendant solicitors to act for him, where he was to contract with another client of the same solicitor in a land development. The solicitor failed to disclose that the other client had convictions for dishonesty, and . .
CitedRatiu, Karmel, Regent House Properties Ltd v Conway CA 22-Nov-2005
The claimant sought damages for defamation. The defendant through their company had accused him acting in such a way as to allow a conflict of interest to arise. They said that he had been invited to act on a proposed purchase but had used the . .
CitedHalton International Inc (Holding) and Another v Guernroy Ltd ChD 9-Sep-2005
Parties had entered into a shareholders’ agreement as to voting arrengemets within a company. Thay disputed whether votes had been used in reach of that agreement, particularly as to the issue of new shares and their allotment, but the court now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Legal Professions

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.222538

South West Africa Cases (Ethiopia v South Africa) (Liberia v South Africa) (second phase): ICJ 18 Jul 1966

ICJ The South West Africa cases (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa), which relate to the continued existence of the Mandate for South West Africa and the duties and performance of South Africa as Mandatory thereunder, were instituted by Applications of the Governments of Ethiopia and Liberia filed in the Registry on 4 November 1960. By an Order of 20 May 1961 the Court joined the proceedings in the two cases. The Government of South Africa raised preliminary objections to the Court’s proceeding to hear the merits of the case, but these were dismissed by the Court on 21 December 1962, the Court finding that it had jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the merits of the dispute.
In its Judgment on the second phase of the cases the Court, by the President’s casting vote, the votes being equally divided (seven-seven), found that the Applicant States could not be considered to have established any legal right or interest in the subject matter of their claims and accordingly decided to reject them.
‘we consider that the norm of non-discrimination or non-separation on the basis of race has become a rule of customary international law . . .’

Citations:

[1966] ICJ Rep 6, 293

Links:

ICJ

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others HL 9-Dec-2004
Extension oh Human Rights Beyond Borders
The appellants complained that the system set up by the respondent where Home Office officers were placed in Prague airport to pre-vet applicants for asylum from Romania were dsicriminatory in that substantially more gypsies were refused entry than . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.220681

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Kaur (Justice, Intervener) Case C-192/99: ECJ 8 Mar 2001

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.

Citations:

Times 08-Mar-2001

Statutes:

British Nationality Act 1981, ECTreaty Art 17 and 18

Immigration, European, International

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.88639

Red Sea Insurance Co Ltd v Bouygues SA and Others: PC 21 Jul 1994

Lex loci delicti (the law of the jurisdiction in which the act complained of took place) can exceptionally be used when the lex fori (the jurisdiction formally assigned) gives no remedy. In the case of a claim under a foreign tort, the double actionability exception may be applied to allow use of the lex loci delicti. Lord Slynn: ‘Their Lordships, having considered all of these opinions, recognise the conflict which exists between, on the one hand, the desirability of a rule which is certain and clear on the basis of which people can act and lawyers advise and, on the other, the desirability of the courts having the power to avoid injustice by introducing an element of flexibility into the rule. They do not consider that the rejection of the doctrine of the proper law of the tort as part of English law is inconsistent with a measure of flexibility being introduced into the rules. They consider that the majority in Boys v Chaplin [1971] AC 356 recognised the need for such flexibility. They accept that the law of England recognises that a particular issue between the parties to litigation may be governed by the law of the country which, with respect to that issue, has the most significant relationship with the occurrence and with the parties. They agree with the statement of Lord Wilberforce, at pp 391-392, . . as to the extent and application of the exception. They accept, as he did, that the exception will not be successfully invoked in every case or even, probably, in many cases and, at p 391H, that ‘The general rule must apply unless clear and satisfying grounds are shown why it should be departed from and what solution, derived from what other rule, should be preferred.’

Judges:

Lord Slynn

Citations:

Gazette 09-Nov-1994, Ind Summary 26-Sep-1994, Times 21-Jul-1994, [1995] 1 AC 190

Citing:

CitedWarren v Warren 1972
(Australia) The plaintiff was injured in a car accident while on a visit to New South Wales, where she had no right of action in tort against her husband. She began her action in Queensland, where she was ordinarily resident and domiciled where such . .
Appeal fromRed Sea Insurance Co Ltd v Bouygues SA and Others 1993
Hong Kong . .

Cited by:

CitedChagos Islanders v The Attorney General, Her Majesty’s British Indian Ocean Territory Commissioner QBD 9-Oct-2003
The Chagos Islands had been a British dependent territory since 1814. The British government repatriated the islanders in the 1960s, and the Ilois now sought damages for their wrongful displacement, misfeasance, deceit, negligence and to establish a . .
CitedHarding v Wealands HL 5-Jul-2006
Claim in UK for Accident in Australia
The claimant had been a passenger in a car driven by his now partner. They had an accident in New South Wales. The car was insured in Australia. He sought leave to sue in England and Wales because Australian law would limit the damages.
Held: . .
CitedRoberts v Gill and Co Solicitors and Others SC 19-May-2010
The claimant beneficiary in the estate sought damages against solicitors who had acted for the claimant’s brother, the administrator, saying they had allowed him to take control of the assets in the estate. The will provided that property was to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Commonwealth

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85926

Pollard and Another v Ashurst: ChD 16 Mar 2000

Where a bankrupt was joint owner of property abroad but within the European Community, an English court could order the property to be sold and the proceeds paid to the trustee. Such an order could not be made against the land itself, but could be effective against the bankrupt in personam. The bankrupt and his wife could be ordered to sell the property at the best price reasonably obtainable, or to require the conveyance of the property to the trustee.

Citations:

Times 16-Mar-2000

Statutes:

Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (1968) (Cmnd 7395), Insolvency Act 1986 436

Insolvency, International, Land

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84787

Petrograde Inc and Another v Smith and Others: QBD 8 Dec 1998

The time when a co-defendant’s domicile fell to be considered under the convention was the time when process was originated not when a co-defendant was added, whether by re-issue or by service of amended writ.

Citations:

Times 08-Dec-1998

Statutes:

Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982, Brussels Convention Art 6

International

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84689

Oxfordshire County Council v S (A Child) (Care Order): FD 11 Nov 1999

An interim care order, whether made here or in a competent court abroad, had the effect of discharging any pre-existing orders for parental responsibility. A non-parent recipient of such a custody or parental responsibility order ceased to have such responsibility on the making of the interim care order.

Citations:

Times 11-Nov-1999

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 8

Children, International

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84513

P v P (Diplomatic Immunity Jurisdiction): FD 2 Mar 1998

A father returning home at end of a diplomatic posting, on his government’s orders had state (not diplomatic) immunity to take the child home with him.

Citations:

Times 02-Mar-1998

Statutes:

Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964

Cited by:

Appeal fromP v P (Diplomatic Immunity: Jurisdiction) CA 25-Mar-1998
A declaration as to abduction will not be made if the only real purpose of the application was to delay a foreign court seised of the matter making a decision. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Children

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84525

Normaco and Another v Lundman and Others: ChD 10 Feb 1999

A Mareva order made ex parte freezing assets world-wide on an interim basis was nevertheless a judgment allowing jurisdiction for recognition and enforcement in foreign jurisdictions once it had been certified as such on an inter partes application.

Citations:

Gazette 10-Feb-1999, Times 06-Jan-1999

Statutes:

Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 50

International

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84331

Morris and Others v Banque Arabe et Internationale D’Investissement Sa: ChD 23 Dec 1999

A party which had been ordered to produce documents which were under its control but in a foreign jurisdiction, did not have the right to refuse to produce them on the grounds that this would require them to breach the laws of the jurisdiction in which they were held. That was clearly a relevant consideration, but the decision remained that of the court which had a wide discretion. Rules regarding the enforcement of illegal contracts were not directly comparable.

Citations:

Times 23-Dec-1999, Gazette 07-Jan-2000

Litigation Practice, International

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83844

Lukowlak v Unidad Editorial SA (No 1): QBD 23 Jul 2001

When a court considered a defamation contained in a multi-jurisdictional publication, and the question of whether there might be any duty to publish, it should recognise and respect the global nature of modern publications, with more widely acknowledged duties to report information, and a public having a more widely recognised right to receive the same information. The court should accordingly avoid entering into a debate using fine distinctions between the laws of the several jurisdictions in which the material had been published.
The reasonable reader is ‘now perceived by the courts, both domestic and international, as having stronger stomachs and more discriminating judgment than was traditionally recognised’.

Citations:

Times 23-Jul-2001, [2001] EMLR 46

Cited by:

CitedUppal v Endemol UK Ltd and Others QBD 9-Apr-2014
The claimant alleged defamation by other contestants at the time when she was participating in the defendants’ TV show, Big Brother. The defendants had broadcast the material. The defendant now sought a ruling that the words complained of were not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, International

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83241

Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Request for Advice and Opinion by Un): ICJ 18 Jul 1996

The threat or actual use of nuclear weapons must only be in accordance with treaties, but if so was not unlawful.

Citations:

Times 18-Jul-1996, (1996) 110 ILR 161

Citing:

CitedLegality of the Use by A State of Nuclear Weapons (Request for Adv Opinn by Who) ICJ 18-Jul-1996
Advisory opinion from ICJ can only be given where in remit of requesting body. . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Jones (Margaret), Regina v Milling and others HL 29-Mar-2006
Domestic Offence requires Domestic Defence
Each defendant sought to raise by way of defence of their otherwise criminal actions, the fact that they were attempting to prevent the commission by the government of the crime of waging an aggressive war in Iraq, and that their acts were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83020

Legality of the Use by A State of Nuclear Weapons (Request for Adv Opinn by Who): ICJ 18 Jul 1996

Advisory opinion from ICJ can only be given where in remit of requesting body.

Citations:

Times 18-Jul-1996

Cited by:

CitedLegality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Request for Advice and Opinion by Un) ICJ 18-Jul-1996
The threat or actual use of nuclear weapons must only be in accordance with treaties, but if so was not unlawful. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83021

In Re J (Minor) (Isle of Man: Adoption): FD 7 Jun 2000

Because the Isle of Man is not part of the United Kingdom under the Act, proceedings for an adoption of a child from the Isle of Man were an inter-country adoption, and so had to be commenced in the High Court. There was, however, nothing to prevent the High Court transferring the case to the County Court in appropriate situations. The need arose even though the Act envisaged a child subject to a freeing order being placed with a Manx couple with a view to adoption.

Citations:

Gazette 22-Jun-2000, Times 07-Jun-2000, Gazette 15-Jun-2000

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976 56

Adoption, Children, International

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81961

In Re Immunity of Special Rapporteur: ICJ 19 May 1999

A special rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers enjoyed the full privileges and immunity from suit of any kind, including for the contents of an interview which might otherwise be defamatory.

Citations:

Times 19-May-1999

Statutes:

Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations

International

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81944

In Re Banco Nacional De Cuba: ChD 7 Jun 2001

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.’

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

Times 18-May-2001, Gazette 07-Jun-2001, [2001] 1 WLR 2039

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 6.20., Insolvency Act 1986 423

Cited by:

CitedShahar v Tsitsekkos and others ChD 17-Nov-2004
The defendant wished to make a claim against another party outside the jurisdiction and was granted permission to serve documents which were headed ‘defence and counterclaim’. The proposed defendant argued that such a document could be served in . .
CitedIslamic Republic of Pakistan v Zardari and others ComC 6-Oct-2006
The claimant alleged that the defendants had funded the purchase of various properties by secret and unlawful commissions taken by them whilst in power in Pakistan. They sought to recover the proceeds. They now sought permission to serve proceedings . .
CitedAshton Investments Ltd. and Another v OJSC Russian Aluminium (Rusal) and others ComC 18-Oct-2006
The claimants sought damages for breach of confidence saying that the defendants had hacked into their computer systems via the internet to seek privileged information in the course of litigation. The defendants denied this and said the courts had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Civil Procedure Rules, Insolvency, Litigation Practice

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81730

Gulf Bank Ksc v Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd: QBD 24 Aug 1993

A foreign contract was within the purview of Order 11 of the Rules of the Supreme Court. The presence of an indemnity clause which was expressly subject to UK law made the rest of the contract also subject to UK law. The indemnity clause was still part of the contract despite government decree.

Citations:

Gazette 17-Nov-1993, Ind Summary 30-Aug-1993, Times 24-Aug-1993

Litigation Practice, International, Contract

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81090

Habib Bank Ltd v Ahmed: QBD 2 Nov 2000

The fact that public policy would sometimes allow the refusal of registration of a foreign judgment did not provide an opportunity to a party here to re-litigate the issue when he had had an opportunity to do so before the foreign court and had failed to take it. Foreign judgments may not be registered if they could be shown to have been obtained by fraud. Here documents were prepared in accordance with Islamic practice, and there was no evidence that any such fraud existed.

Citations:

Times 02-Nov-2000, Gazette 09-Nov-2000

Statutes:

Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933

International, Litigation Practice

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81110

Al-Adsani v Government of Kuwait and Others (No 2): CA 29 Mar 1996

The claimant alleged that he had suffered torture in a security prison in Kuwait, and he obtained leave to serve out of the jurisdiction on the Government of Kuwait, and on three individuals, one of whom at least was served, on the ground that he had in consequence suffered psychological damage after returning to and while in England. The Government of Kuwait applied to set aside the service on it, and for a declaration that it had immunity under s.1(1) of the 1978 Act.
Held: The State of Kuwait was entitled to state immunity from a claim for damages for torture. The Act was a comprehensive code. Although international law prohibited torture, no express or implied exception to immunity existed in cases of torture. The draftsman of the State Immunity Act must have been well aware of the numerous international conventions covering torture (although he could not, of course, have been aware of the convention against torture in 1984). If civil claims based on acts of torture were intended to be excluded from the immunity afforded by section 1(1) of the Act of 1978, because of the horrifying nature of such acts, or because they are condemned by international law, it is inconceivable that section 1(1) would not have said so.
Ward LJ: (As to the 1978 Act) ‘Unfortunately, the Act is as plain as plain can be. A foreign state enjoys no immunity for acts causing personal injury committed in the United Kingdom and if that is expressly provided for the conclusion is impossible to escape that state immunity is afforded in respect of acts of torture committed outside this jurisdiction.’
Stuart-Smith LJ: ‘At common law a sovereign state could not be sued at all against its will in the courts of this country. The 1978 Act, by the exceptions therein set out, makes substantial inroads into this principle. It is inconceivable, it seems to me, that the draftsman, who must have been well aware of the various international agreements about torture, intended section 1 to be subject to an overriding qualification.’

Judges:

Stuart-Smith LJ, Ward LJ

Citations:

Times 29-Mar-1996, (1996) 107 ILR 536

Statutes:

State Immunity Act 1978 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed toMcElhinney v Ireland; Al-Adsani v United Kingdom; Fogarty v United Kingdom ECHR 21-Nov-2001
Grand Chamber – The first applicant said he had been injured by a shot fired by a British soldier who had been carried for two miles into the Republic of Ireland, clinging to the applicant’s vehicle following an incident at a checkpoint.
Held: . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromMcElhinney v Ireland; Al-Adsani v United Kingdom; Fogarty v United Kingdom ECHR 21-Nov-2001
Grand Chamber – The first applicant said he had been injured by a shot fired by a British soldier who had been carried for two miles into the Republic of Ireland, clinging to the applicant’s vehicle following an incident at a checkpoint.
Held: . .
CitedJones v Ministry of Interior Al-Mamlaka Al-Arabiya As Saudiya Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) and Another CA 28-Oct-2004
The claimants sought damages alleging torture by the respondent whilst held in custody in Saudi Arabia.
Held: Although the state enjoyed freedom from action, where the acts were ones of torture, and action could proceed against state officials . .
CitedRegina v Bartle and The Commissioner Of Police For The Metropolis and Others Ex Parte Pinochet Ugarte, Regina v Evans and Another and The Commissioner of Police For The Metropolis and Others (No 1) HL 22-Nov-1998
The government of Spain had issued an arrest warrant and application for extradition in respect of Pinochet Ugarte for his alleged crimes whilst president of Chile. He was arrested in England. He pleaded that he had immunity from prosecution.
CitedAziz v Republic of Yemen CA 17-Jun-2005
The claimant had made a claim for unfair dismissal. The defendant state had filed a defence instead of claiming state immunity. It then sought to assert such immunity. The claimant said the state had waived its immunity.
Held: Section 2(7) of . .
CitedRegina v Bartle and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte; Regina v Evans and Similar (No 3) HL 24-Mar-1999
An application to extradite a former head of state for an offence which was not at the time an offence under English law would fail, but could proceed in respect of allegations of acts after that time. No immunity was intended for heads of state. . .
CitedAugusto Pinochet Ugarte and In the Matter of an Application for Leave To Move for Judicial Review Regina v Evans (Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate) Admn 28-Oct-1998
A provisional warrant had been issued by a magistrate for the arrest of the former president of Chile when visting London. The arrest had been in response to an extradition request from a judge in Spain and related to allegations of criminal acts by . .
CitedJones v Ministry of Interior for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others HL 14-Jun-2006
The claimants said that they had been tortured by Saudi police when arrested on false charges. They sought damages, and appealed against an order denying jurisdiction over the defendants. They said that the allegation of torture allowed an exception . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Constitutional

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.77703

Bekleyen v Land Berlin: ECJ 21 Jan 2010

EEC-Turkey Association Agreement Second paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council Right of the child of a Turkish worker to respond to any offer of employment in the host Member State in which that child has completed a vocational training course Start of the vocational training course after the parents have permanently left that Member State

Citations:

[2010] EUECJ C-462/08, [2010] 2 CMLR 35

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

OpinionBekleyen v Land Berlin ECJ 29-Oct-2009
ECJ (External Relations) Opinion – EEC-Turkey Association Agreement Free movement of workers Article 7, second paragraph, of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council The right of the child of a Turkish worker . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608659

National Iranian Tanker Company v Council: ECJ 11 Apr 2018

External Relations – Restrictive Measures v Iran – Opinion – Appeal – Common Foreign and Security Policy – Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation – Freezing of funds – Action for annulment – Re-listing decision following annulment of initial listing decision by EU Courts on the merits – Article 266 TFEU – General principles of EU law – Fundamental rights – Right to an effective remedy – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Articles 6(1) and 13 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:227, [2018] EUECJ C-600/16P – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

International

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608642

Re W: CA 27 Mar 2018

The parent against whom an application had been made for the return of children said to have been abducted to a foreign jurisdiction said that she anticipated being refused a visa to be allowed to enter the USA to return them under a humanitarian parole visa. If the father left the USA to collect them, it was unlikely that he would be allowed to return.

Judges:

Moylan, Peter Jackson LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 664, [2018] WLR(D) 192

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Hague Child Abduction Convention

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, International

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608367

Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Emmott: CA 31 Jan 2018

The court was asked whether the claimant is, as the judge below held, entitled to an anti-suit injunction restraining the defendant from pursuing foreign proceedings in view of an arbitration agreement between them governed by the law of England and Wales and the arbitration which has been completed in London pursuant to that agreement.

Judges:

Sir Terence Etherton MR

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 51

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration, International

Updated: 04 April 2022; Ref: scu.604147

Vilca and Others v Xstrata Ltd and Another: QBD 19 Jan 2018

Claims for personal injuries suffered during a protest in Peru about a company whose parent company was registered within the UK. The court now heard submissions as to the Peruvian law of limitation.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 27 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction, Limitation, International

Updated: 03 April 2022; Ref: scu.603732