Tag: Jurisdiction

Connelly v RTZ Corporation Plc: CA 29 Sep 1995

Availability of legal aid to a party is not a relevant consideration to rules of forum non conveniens.

Citations:

Independent 29-Sep-1995, Times 20-Oct-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Connelly v RTZ Corporation Plc and others HL 24-Jul-1997
The availability of legal aid to a party is not part of criteria for choosing jurisdiction save in exceptional circumstances.
Lord Goff discussed the Spiliada case: ‘the burden of proof rests on the defendant to persuade the court to exercise . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Jurisdiction, Legal Aid

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.79443

HM Revenue and Customs v Begum and Others: ChD 15 Jul 2010

The Commissioners claim was founded in an alleged conspiracy from a ‘missing trader intra-community fraud’ amounting to andpound;96 million.
Held: Section 423 had extra territorial effect.

Judges:

David Richards J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 1799 (Ch), [2011] BPIR 59

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 423

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regalway Care Ltd v Shillingford and others ChD 25-Feb-2005
Applications to vary freezing order. Blackburne J set out a description of the workings of missing trader intra-community VAT carousel frauds. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others v Nazir and Others ChD 30-Jul-2012
The company was said to have engaged in a fraud based on false European Trading Scheme Allowances, and had been wound up by the Revenue. The liquidators, in the company name, now sought recovery from former directors and associates.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, VAT, Insolvency, Jurisdiction

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.420810

Smyth v Behbehani, Behbehani and Philip Ross and Company (a Firm): CA 11 Mar 1999

The defendant appealed against a refusal of an order declining jurisdiction for forum non conveniens.
Held: Though a court should be very careful to make any order in a matter which was being litigated in a foreign jurisdiction for fear of being party to procedural manipulation, it could do so where the making of the order would assist both parties.

Citations:

Times 09-Apr-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 954

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.89354

VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and Others: ChD 29 Nov 2011

The appellant bank had granted very substantial lending facilities to the defendant companies, and now alleged fraudulent misrepresentation. The defendants now sought to have the service set aside. The claimants also sought permission to amend the pleadings to set aside the veil of incorporation to add three further defendants.
Held: Leave was set aside. The application to amend was refused. The evidence did not establish a real risk of dissipation of assets by the fourth defendant and the original order was tainted by material non-disclosure by the claimant to the court.

Judges:

Arnold J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 3107 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At First Instance – VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and Others SC 6-Feb-2013
The claimant bank said that it had been induced to create very substantial lending facilities by fraudulent misrepresentation by the defendants. They now appealed against findings that England was not clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum for . .
Appeal from – VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and Others CA 20-Jun-2012
The claimant bank said that it had been induced to create very substantial lending facilities by fraudulent misrepresentation by the defendants. They now appealed against findings that England was not clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum for . .
Cited – Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others SC 12-Jun-2013
In the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce, questions arose regarding company assets owned by the husband. The court was asked as to the power of the court to order the transfer of assets owned entirely in the company’s names. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Company, Jurisdiction

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.449025

Milor SRL and Others v British Airways Plc: CA 15 Feb 1996

The Warsaw Convention allows ‘forum shopping’, and the doctrine of forum non conveniens applies. Article 28(1) specifies the jurisdictions in which claims under the Convention may be brought. If the English Court is one of those jurisdictions, then our procedural rules which permit an action to be stayed in favour of another jurisdiction on grounds of convenience should not be applied in favour of another competent jurisdiction.
Phillips LJ said: ‘by way of example, if the procedural law of the chosen forum imposed a 12 month limitation period, it does not seem to me that this could displace the two year period of limitation laid down by article 29 of the Convention’.

Judges:

Phillips LJ

Citations:

Times 15-Feb-1996, [1996] QB 702

Statutes:

Warsaw Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules regarding International Air Transport 1929

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – GKN Westland Helicopters Ltd and Another v Korean Air Lines Co Ltd; Press Tech Controls Ltd v Same ComC 19-May-2003
The sum accepted as a payment in, in an air carriage case was capable of being the ‘amount of damages’ awarded under the convention. That it exceeded the amount offered in settlement negotiations meant that the rights to costs under article 22.4 . .
Cited – Laroche v Spirit of Adventure (UK) Ltd CA 21-Jan-2009
Hot Air balloon was an aircraft: damages limited
The claimant was injured flying in the defendant’s hot air balloon. The defendant said that the journey was covered by the 1967 Regulations and the damages limited accordingly. The claimant appealed against a decision that the balloon was an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Jurisdiction, Transport

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.83735

Balkanbank v Taher and Others (No 3): CA 1 Dec 1994

The court will allow a counterclaim on an undertaking after the action had ceased in other Jurisdiction, and the court had power to award damages arising from a Mareva injunction obtained in Ireland.

Citations:

Times 01-Dec-1994, Gazette 05-Jan-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Balkanbank v Taher and Others 19-Feb-1994
Disclosure of legal advice. . .
See Also – Balkanbank v Taher and Others (No 2) CA 18-Nov-1994
The plaintiffs had sued in Ireland and obtained a Mareva injunction. That injunction was then first extended to a worldwide injunction, before being set aside. The court could itself to enquire as to damages without deciding whether to enforce the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Jurisdiction

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.78115

H (a Minor) (Foreign Custody Order: Enforcement): CA 19 Nov 1993

After a divorce, the Belgian Court had granted the father a contact order, for him to receive her at home at holidays. The mother moved to England, breaching the order. The father had the order registered here, then sought to enforce it. The court had found the girl to have a genuine fear of the father, but thought that he had no discretion.
Held: The High court did indeed have a discretion. The phrase ‘recognition and enforcement’ were to be read disjunctively, and enforcement would not follow automatically from registration. A foreign court order need not be enforced here if it was clearly no longer in the child’s best interests.

Citations:

Times 19-Nov-1993, Ind Summary 22-Nov-1993, [1994] 2 WLR 269

Statutes:

European Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions etc 10(1), Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 16 S2-A10(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Jurisdiction

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.81917

Continental Bank Na v Aeakos Compania Naviera Sa and Others: CA 26 Nov 1993

The Bank was entitled to an injunction in the UK, by virtue of the jurisdiction given in their agreement, even though it was not the UK court which was first seised of the matter. Steyn LJ said: ‘. . a claim for damages for breach of contract would be a relatively ineffective remedy. An injunction is the only effective remedy for the appellants’ breach of contract. If the injunction is set aside, the appellants will persist in their breach of contract, and the bank’s legal rights as enshrined in the jurisdiction agreements will prove to be valueless. Given the total absence of special countervailing factors, this is the paradigm case for the grant of an injunction . .’

Judges:

Steyn LJ

Citations:

Ind Summary 13-Dec-1993, Times 26-Nov-1993, [1994] 1 WLR 588

Statutes:

Brussels Convention 1968 Art 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – National Westminster Bank v Utrecht-America Finance Company CA 10-May-2001
An agreement between the parties for assignment or novation of a credit agreement, contained a ‘take out’ agreement (‘TOA’). The defendant began proceedings in California to rescind the agreement, and the claimants obtained summary judgement under . .
Cited – OT Africa Line Ltd v Magic Sportswear Corporation and others CA 13-Jun-2005
The parties to a contract had agreed that the proper law for the contract was England. One party commenced proceedings in Canada, and the courts of Canada had accepted jurisdiction as the most appropriate and convenient forum to resolve the dispute. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Banking, Jurisdiction

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.79470

Sarrio Sa v Kuwait Investment Authority: HL 17 Nov 1997

The parties were spanish companies. They were involved in proceedings against each other in Spain. The respondent had begun an action here for negligent misrepresentation against the appellant. The appellant argued that given the Spanish proceedings, the English court did not have jurisdiction because of article 22.
Held: If the actions were related then the Spanish courts were first seised and had exclusive jurisdiction. The decision as to whether actions are related to each other, is based upon broad common sense, and not on any distinction between essential and non-essential issues.

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Clyde, Lord Saville

Citations:

Times 17-Nov-1997, [1997] UKHL 49, [1999] AC 32, [1997] 4 All ER 929, [1997] 3 WLR 1143, [1998] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 129, [1998] Lloyd’s Rep Bank 57, [1997] CLC 1640, [1998] ILPr 319, Independent 19-Nov-1997

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Brussels Convention 1968 Art 22, Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act of 1982 22

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority CA 12-Aug-1996
. .
Cited – The owners of the cargo lately laden on board the ship ‘Tatry’ v The owners of the ship ‘Maciej Rataj’ ECJ 6-Dec-1994
ECJ On a proper construction, Article 57 of the Brussels Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments as amended means that, where a Contracting State is also a contracting party to another . .
At First Instance – Sarrio SA v Kuwait Investment Authority ComC 12-Oct-1995
cw Conflict of laws – Brussels Convention – articles 21-22 – right to invoke – independent of domicile – forum conveniens – defendant domiciled in non-Contracting State – exclusion of common law rules – same . .

Cited by:

Cited – Casio Computer Co Ltd v Sayo and others CA 11-Apr-2001
The court was asked whether a constructive trust claim based on dishonest assistance is a matter ‘relating to tort, delict or quasi delict’ for the purpose of Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention?
Held: A constructive trust claim based upon . .
Cited – In re The Alexandros T SC 6-Nov-2013
The parties had disputed insurance claims after the foundering of the Alexandros T. After allegations of misbehaviour by the underwriters, the parties had settled the claims in a Tomlin Order. Five years later, however, the shipowners began . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Jurisdiction

Updated: 17 October 2022; Ref: scu.89014

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and others: ComC 25 May 2007

Application for an order to prevent some defendants pursuing action in other jurisdictions.

Judges:

Mackie QC J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1510 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd ComC 17-May-2005
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd CA 24-Oct-2005
The defendants who were resident in Greece appealed a decision that the English court had jurisdiction over them, by virtue of a close connection of the matter with earlier proceedings heard here.
Held: The fact that the defendants were all . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 28-Jul-2006
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 14-Mar-2007
Judgment on quantum. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 11-Jul-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 23-May-2008
Application for interpretation of a receivership order. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another (No 3) CA 6-Jun-2008
The court was asked whether the English court has jurisdiction following judgment to grant an anti-suit injunction against foreign judgment debtors (one of whom has a domicile in a Brussels I Regulation State) restraining them from pursuing . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and others CA 28-Jul-2008
The judgment creditor appealed an order refusing to oblige the defendant company to attend court and provide information about its means. . .
Appeal from – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 4-Apr-2008
The court was asked whether the Commercial Court had international jurisdiction to make an order for the appointment of a receiver by way of equitable execution, and a freezing order, in relation to the judgment debtors’ interest in the concession . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 20-Dec-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and Another ComC 17-Jun-2008
Application for further order of payment of costs of action on account. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 21-Oct-2008
The court heard matters relating to the recovery by the claimant of $63,000,000. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors (Oil and Gas) Company Sal CA 6-Feb-2009
Appeal from order with regard to management of receivership. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others HL 30-Jul-2009
The claimant sought to enforce a judgment debt against a foreign resident company, and for this purpose to examine or have examined a director who lived abroad. The defendant said that the rules gave no such power and they did, the power was outside . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and others CA 13-Nov-2008
The creditors sought leave to appeal against orders made in the course of proceedings to recover a very substantial debt from a foreign resident company. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others ComC 6-Oct-2010
The third respondent sought to strike out an application for his committal for failure to comply with orders made in support of proceedings to enforce a substantial judgment. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal ComC 21-Oct-2010
The court held a case management conference with regard to an intended application for committal for contempt of one of the defendants. . .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 21-Jan-2011
. .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 3-Feb-2011
. .
See Also – Masri and Another v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others ComC 3-Mar-2011
On notice hearing with regard to without notice receivership order. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others ComC 5-May-2011
The applicant, and judgment creditor sought orders for committal for contempt by the defendant companies and officers after failing to comply with court orders. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.254464

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd: ComC 17 May 2005

Judges:

Cresswell J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 944 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd CA 24-Oct-2005
The defendants who were resident in Greece appealed a decision that the English court had jurisdiction over them, by virtue of a close connection of the matter with earlier proceedings heard here.
Held: The fact that the defendants were all . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 28-Jul-2006
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and others ComC 25-May-2007
Application for an order to prevent some defendants pursuing action in other jurisdictions. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 11-Jul-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 4-Apr-2008
The court was asked whether the Commercial Court had international jurisdiction to make an order for the appointment of a receiver by way of equitable execution, and a freezing order, in relation to the judgment debtors’ interest in the concession . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 23-May-2008
Application for interpretation of a receivership order. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another (No 3) CA 6-Jun-2008
The court was asked whether the English court has jurisdiction following judgment to grant an anti-suit injunction against foreign judgment debtors (one of whom has a domicile in a Brussels I Regulation State) restraining them from pursuing . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and others CA 28-Jul-2008
The judgment creditor appealed an order refusing to oblige the defendant company to attend court and provide information about its means. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 14-Mar-2007
Judgment on quantum. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 20-Dec-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and Another ComC 17-Jun-2008
Application for further order of payment of costs of action on account. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 21-Oct-2008
The court heard matters relating to the recovery by the claimant of $63,000,000. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and others CA 13-Nov-2008
The creditors sought leave to appeal against orders made in the course of proceedings to recover a very substantial debt from a foreign resident company. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors (Oil and Gas) Company Sal CA 6-Feb-2009
Appeal from order with regard to management of receivership. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others HL 30-Jul-2009
The claimant sought to enforce a judgment debt against a foreign resident company, and for this purpose to examine or have examined a director who lived abroad. The defendant said that the rules gave no such power and they did, the power was outside . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others ComC 6-Oct-2010
The third respondent sought to strike out an application for his committal for failure to comply with orders made in support of proceedings to enforce a substantial judgment. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others ComC 5-May-2011
The applicant, and judgment creditor sought orders for committal for contempt by the defendant companies and officers after failing to comply with court orders. . .
See Also – Masri and Another v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others ComC 3-Mar-2011
On notice hearing with regard to without notice receivership order. . .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 3-Feb-2011
. .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 21-Jan-2011
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal ComC 21-Oct-2010
The court held a case management conference with regard to an intended application for committal for contempt of one of the defendants. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Jurisdiction

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.226287

Taurus Petroleum Ltd v State Oilmarketing Company: ComC 18 Nov 2013

The parties referred their contract disputes to an arbitration in London which was to apply Iraqi law. As to enforcement of the award, the defendant denied that they were situated in London.
Held: The debts were situated in London rather than New York and that SOMO was a separate entity from the state of Iraq and did not contract as its agent. As a result, if the debts under the letters of credit had been owed to SOMO alone, they would not have been immune from execution. However, each letter of credit contained a single joint promise in favour of SOMO and CBI and thus a joint debt in respect of which the court could not make a third party debt order.
The debts, being the property of CBI as the Central Bank, were in any event immune from execution under sections 13(2) and 14(4) of the State Immunity Act 1978. He therefore set aside the interim third party debt orders and the receivership orders. He also granted permission to appeal and ordered a stay of execution.

Judges:

Field J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 4495 (Comm), [2014] 1 Lloyds Rep 432, [2014] 1 All ER (Comm) 942

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

State Immunity Act 1978

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Taurus Petroleum Led v State Oil Marketing Company of The Ministry of Oil, Republic of Iraq ComC 18-Nov-2013
. .
Appeal from – Taurus Petroleum Ltd v State Oil Company of The Ministry of Oil, Republic of Iraq CA 28-Jul-2015
The parties had contractual disputes as to letters of credit governed by Iraqi law. The arbitration was in London applying Iraqi law. They now disputed whether the Enforcement of arbitration award was as an award made in London. Each appealed . .
At ComC (1) – Taurus Petroleum Limited v State Oil Marketing Company of The Ministry of Oil, Republic of Iraq SC 25-Oct-2017
The parties disputed their contract arrangements. It was referred to an arbitration in London, but applying Iraqi law. The respondent failed to meet the award made against it, and the claimant sought to enforce the award here by means of third party . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, International

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.575329

Reyes v Al-Malki and Another: SC 18 Oct 2017

The claimant alleged that she had been discrimated against in her work for the appellant, a member of the diplomatic staff at the Saudi Embassy in London. She now appealed against a decision that the respondent had diplomatic immunity.
Held: The appeal was allowed: ‘the question whether the exception in article 31(1)(c) would have applied to Mr Al-Malki had he still been in post does not strictly speaking arise. If he had still been in post, I would have held that he was immune, because the employment and treatment of Ms Reyes did not amount to carrying on or participating in carrying on a professional or commercial activity. Her employment, although it continued for about two months, was plainly not an alternative occupation of Mr Al-Malki’s. Nothing that was done by him or his wife was done by way of business. A person who supplies goods or services by way of business might be said to exercise a commercial activity. But Mr and Mrs Al-Malki are not said to have done that. They are merely said to have used Ms Reyes’ services in a harsh and in some respects unlawful way. There is no sense which can reasonably be given to article 31(1)(c) which would make the consumption of goods and services the exercise a commercial activity.’
Lord Sumption (with Neuberger L) said: ‘ the employment of a domestic servant to provide purely personal services is not a ‘professional or commercial activity exercised by the diplomatic agent’. It is therefore not within the only relevant exception to the immunities. The fact that the employment of Ms Reyes may have come about as a result of human trafficking makes no difference to this. But the appeal should be allowed on a different and narrower ground. On 29 August 2014, Mr Al-Malki’s posting in London came to an end and he left the United Kingdom. Article 31 confers immunity only while he is in post. A diplomatic agent who is no longer in post and who has left the country is entitled to immunity only on the narrower basis authorised by article 39(2). That immunity applies only so far as the relevant acts were performed while he was in post in the exercise of his diplomatic functions. The employment and maltreatment of Ms Reyes were not acts performed by Mr Al-Malki in the exercise of his diplomatic functions.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption

Citations:

[2018] 1 All ER 629, [2017] UKSC 61, [2017] ICR 1417, [2018] IRLR 267, [2017] 3 WLR 923, [2017] WLR(D) 692, [2019] AC 735, UKSC 2016/0023

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC Video 20170515 am, SC Video 20170515 pm, SC Video 20170516 am, SC Video 20170516 pm, SC Video 20170517 am, SC Video 20170517 pm

Statutes:

Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At EAT – Al-Malki and Another v Reyes and Another (Jurisdictional Points) EAT 4-Oct-2013
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS
Two domestic workers, employed one after the other by the First Respondent, a diplomat, and Second Respondent, his wife, (the appellants in this appeal) asserted they had been . .
At CA – Reyes and Another v Al-Malki and Another CA 5-Feb-2015
The claimants wished to make employment law claims alleging, inter alia, that they had suffered racial discrimination and harassment, and had been paid less than the national minimum wage aganst the respondents. They had been assessed as having been . .
Cited – Democratic Republic of the Congo v Belgium – Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 ICJ 14-Feb-2002
(French Text) Diplomatic immunity is not an immunity from liability. It is a procedural immunity from the jurisdiction of the courts of the receiving state. The receiving state cannot at one and the same time receive a diplomatic agent of a foreign . .
Cited – Zoernsch v Waldock CA 1964
A claim was lodged against a former president as well as the current secretary of the European Commission of Human Rights. The former president, Sir Humphrey Waldock, was under the 1960 Order entitled to ‘the like immunity from legal process as is . .
Cited – Fothergill v Monarch Airlines Ltd HL 10-Jul-1980
The plaintiff, on arriving at the airport found that his luggage had been lost. The defendant denied liability saying he had not notified his claim within the requisite period.
Held: Elementary justice requires that the rules by which the . .
Cited – Jones 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 . .
Cited – Wokuri v Kassam ChD 30-Jan-2012
. .
Cited – Abusabib and Another v Taddese EAT 20-Dec-2012
EAT Jurisdictional Points : State Immunity – Diplomatic Immunity
The First Respondent, who had been found liable together with the Second Respondent for acts of discrimination against the Claimant in a . .
Cited – Regina v Central Criminal Court Ex Parte Propend Finance Pty Ltd and Others QBD 17-Mar-1994
A Home Secretary requesting warrants must be specific on the type he required. It was his duty, and not that of the police to state the method of seizure of documents for use in a foreign jurisdiction. A judge making an order should give reasons for . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Adan, Same, ex parte Aitsegeur HL 20-Dec-2000
The Convention gave protection to an asylum seeker fearing persecution by non-state agents in his country of origin where that government was unable or unwilling to provide protection. France and Germany did not recognise this right, and therefore . .
Cited – Baccus SRL v Servicio Nacional Del Trigo CA 1956
The defendant organisation carried on business from Spain and was sued in England for damages for breach of a commercial contract. An appearance was entered by their solicitors in London and a consent order made for security for the organisation’s . .
Cited – Tabion v Mufti 1996
(4th Circuit – United States) The appellant worked for two years as a domestic servant in the home of the respondent diplomats. The appellant brought proceedings claiming damages for breach of the terms of her contract of employment. In response to . .
Cited – CA Empson v Smith CA 1965
Proceedings were begun against Mr Smith, a member of the administrative staff of the Canadian High Commission in London, claiming damages under a private tenancy agreement. As the proceedings were commenced, he enjoyed the same immunity under the . .
Cited – Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South-West Africa) Notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970) ICJ 21-Jun-1971
The International Court of Justice referred to the maintenance of an apartheid regime as being a flagrant violation of the purposes and principles of the UN Charter,
Article 22(1) of the Covenant of the League of Nations provided for the grant . .
Cited – Shaw v Shaw 1979
The wife filed a petition for a dissolution of her marriage to a diplomat attached to the United States embassy. At the time, he was immune, but the petition was allowed to proceed once the husband’s posting came to an end and he left the United . .
Cited – Islamic Republic of Iran v United States of America – Oil Platforms – Judgment of 6 November 2003 ICJ 6-Nov-2003
. .
Cited – Downes Manor Properties Ltd v Bank of Namibia and An CA 18-Mar-1999
The choice of a lawyer outside the UK to provide services as part of litigation did not excuse the failure to comply with an unless order made by the court. Such orders are intended to be punitive. The use of lawyers outside the UK was not . .
Cited – Playa Larga (Owners of Cargo Lately Laden on Board) v I Congresso del Partido (Owners) HL 1983
The concept of absolute immunity for a Sovereign adopts a theory of restrictive immunity in so far as it concerns the activities of a State engaging in trade: (Lord Wilberforce) ‘It was argued by the [appellants] that even if the Republic of Cuba . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Jurisdiction

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.597260

UCP Plc v Nectrus Ltd: ComC 21 Feb 2018

Application for stay pending proceedings in Isle of Man

Judges:

Mrs Justice Cockerill

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 380 (Comm), [2018] WLR(D) 139

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – UCP Plc v Nectrus Ltd ComC 5-Jul-2019
. .
See Also – UCP Plc v Nectrus Ltd ComC 29-Nov-2019
Damages assessment . .
See also – Nectrus Ltd v UCP Plc CA 21-Jan-2021
Application for reconsideration of refusal of leave to appeal. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.606420

Empresa Exportadora de Azucar v Industria Azucarera Nacional S.A, The Playa Larga: CA 1983

There had been a theft by Cuban sellers of one cargo of sugar, property in which had already passed to the buyers, and non-delivery of a second combined with trickery whereby the intended buyers were nonetheless induced to pay its price. The first cargo was on a vessel which was discharging at its Chilean discharge port, when the vessel was withdrawn by the sellers. The second cargo was on the high seas en route to Chile when withdrawn.
Held: The effect of disregarding a provision of foreign law as manifestly contrary to public policy may be to render enforceable in England a contract which is not enforceable by its proper law. The court considered the measure of damages in relation to the non-delivery of goods sold by the defendants to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs claimed that the damages recoverable should be related to the highest price prevailing at any time between the date of the breach and the date of the arbitration award. This contention was rejected.
Ackner LJ said: ‘Mr. Rix, in his cross-appeal, argued that the damages recoverable by Iansa in contract should be related to the highest price prevailing at any time between the date of the breach and date of the award. Mr. Justice Mustill rejected this submission and has set out his reasons most fully, which we are happy to adopt. We would, however, venture to suggest that the matter can be put more simply. Iansa, as complainants, must establish what damage they have suffered. Mr. Rix had to accept: (a) That after the date when Iansa could have bought in to cover their loss there was no evidence at all that the fluctuations in the sugar market made the slightest financial difference to them. There was no evidence that they could have sold at the highest price. On the contrary, the reasonable inference was that the goods would have been resold for domestic or other consumption in Chile, (b) Although theoretically Cubazucar was capable of selling the sugar at the highest price, there is no evidence that it did so.
Accordingly, to the plaintiffs’ contention that Cubazucar should not profit from its own wrong comes the simple reply: they have not shown that Cubazucar have done so. We cannot, therefore, see any basis upon which Iansa can seek to achieve a windfall in the form of an extra $1,200 per tonne over and above the price which was prevailing when they should have bought in the market.’
The Court rejected any defence of foreign act of state, primarily because there was no such plea and no proof that the acts were acts of the Chilean government, but secondarily also because, if they were, there ‘seems no compelling reason for judicial restraint or abstention’ in a case ‘where it is clear that the acts relied on were carried out outside the sovereign’s own territory’.

Judges:

Ackner LJ, Stephenson LJ, Sir Segab Shaw

Citations:

[1983] 2 Lloyds Rep 171

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Playa Larga (Owners of Cargo Lately Laden on Board) v I Congreso del Partido (Owners) QBD 1978
The trading or commercial activities of states are not protected by state immunity. The basic principle of international law is that all states are equal, the rule is ‘par in parem non habet imperium’. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Fiona Trust and Holding Corporation and others v Privalov and others CA 24-Jan-2007
The court was asked whether when contracts have been induced by bribery and have been rescinded on discovery of the bribery, that constitutes a dispute which can be determined by arbitration in the context of a common form of arbitration clause.
Followed – Aggeliki Charis Compania Maritima SA v Pagnan SpA The Angelic Grace QBD 1994
The court considered whether a claim for a collision between two ships was governed by an arbitration clause which read ‘all disputes from time to time arising out of this contract shall . . be referred to the arbitrament of two arbitrators carrying . .
Followed – The Ermoupolis 1990
A claim for the tort of conversion fell within the phrase ‘any dispute arising in any way whatsoever out of this bill of lading’. . .
Cited – Aspect Contracts (Asbetos) Ltd v Higgins Construction Plc SC 17-Jun-2015
Aspect had claimed the return of funds paid by it to the appellant Higgins under an adjudication award in a construction contract disute. The claimant had been asked to prpare asbestos surveys and reports on maisonettes which Higgins was to acquire . .
Cited – Belhaj and Another v Straw and Others SC 17-Jan-2017
The claimant alleged complicity by the defendant, (now former) Foreign Secretary, in his mistreatment by the US while held in Libya. He also alleged involvement in his unlawful abduction and removal to Libya, from which had had fled for political . .
Appeal from – Playa Larga (Owners of Cargo Lately Laden on Board) v I Congresso del Partido (Owners) HL 1983
The concept of absolute immunity for a Sovereign adopts a theory of restrictive immunity in so far as it concerns the activities of a State engaging in trade: (Lord Wilberforce) ‘It was argued by the [appellants] that even if the Republic of Cuba . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Jurisdiction, Contract, Damages

Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.248210

Nordea Bank Norge Asa and Another v Unicredit Corporate Banking Spa and Another: ComC 19 Jan 2011

The defendants had sought a stay of the proceedings in England pending resolution of related proceedings already commenced in Italy.

Judges:

Gloster J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 30 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation 44/2001 27 28

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.428083

Aguirre Zarraga: ECJ 22 Dec 2010

ECJ (Area Of Freedom, Security And Justice) Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 – Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility – Parental responsibility – Custody – Child Abduction – Article 42 – Execution a certified decision ordering the return of a child issued by a competent court (Spanish) – Jurisdiction of the court required (German) to refuse enforcement of that decision in case of serious violation of child rights.

Citations:

C-491/10, [2010] EUECJ C-491/10

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Jurisdiction

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427661

SK Slavia Praha-Fotbal As v Debt Collect London Ltd and Another: CA 4 Nov 2010

SSPF disputed the court’s jurisdiction to hear the claimant’s case for a debt said to be due, appealing against a finding that the court in Prague was not first seised of the dispute.

Judges:

Mummery, Lloyd, Stanley Burnton LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1250, [2011] Bus LR 412, [2011] CP Rep 10, [2011] 1 All ER (Comm) 699, [2010] 2 CLC 852, [2011] 1 WLR 866

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

ouncil Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on Jurisdiction and the Recognition of Judgments in Civil and Commercial matters in the European Union

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction, Contract

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.425803

JSC BTA Bank v Granton Trade Ltd and Others: ComC 19 Oct 2010

Judges:

Christopher Clarke J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2577 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov and Others (Rev 1) ComC 24-Aug-2010
Application for an ‘unless’ order debarring the respondents from defending and entitling the claimant to enter judgment unless certain information and documents were provided. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425346

UBS Ag, London Branch and Another v Kommunale Wasserwerke Leipzig Gmbh: ComC 15 Oct 2010

The defendant asked the court to decline jurisdiction.
Held: Gloster J stated: ‘In the present case the relevant requirement is to be found in CPR 7.5. That provides that a claim form which is to be served within the jurisdiction must be served within four months of the date of issue; and one which is to be served outside the jurisdiction must be served within six months of the date of issue. There is no additional requirement upon the claimant to serve ‘forthwith’ or ‘as soon as practicable’. Nor is there any obligation upon a claimant to choose the quickest method of service, for example personal service rather than service by contractually-agreed method. Under CPR 7.6, a claimant who seeks to extend the time for compliance with CPR 7.5, must explain how he has taken all reasonable steps to comply with rule 7.5 (i.e. served within the requisite four- or six-month period), not how he has acted with all reasonable speed since issue of the claim form.’
‘However, in any event, it does not seem to me that my conclusion as to the reasonableness of UBS’ behaviour is of any relevance. It cannot be appropriate that, under Article 30, the relevant court has to conduct an enquiry as to whether, applying some wholly uncertain subjective criteria, it regards the issuing party as having inappropriately delayed the service of process. That would introduce the very uncertainty that Article 30 was apparently designed to avoid. The only criterion has to be that the issuing party has subsequently ‘failed to take the steps he was required to take to have service effected on the defendant’.’

Judges:

Gloster DBE J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2566 (Comm), [2012] Bus LR D15, [2010] 2 CLC 499

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Thum v Thum FC 21-Oct-2016
No abuse of process in service error
The husband claimed that the W was guilty of abuse of process by issuing the divorce petion, but then not serving it for many months in an attempt to gain a tactical jurisdictional advantage under Brussels II.
Held: H’s application was . .
Cited – Miller and Dos Santos v The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union and Others QBD 13-Nov-2016
Article 50 Notice Requires Parliament’s Authority
The applicant challenged a decision by the respondent that he could use Crown prerogative powers to issue a notice under section 50 TUE to initiate the United Kingdom leaving the EU following the referendum under the 2015 Act.
Held: Once the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425314

Parker v Schuller: CA 1901

The plaintiffs had obtained leave to serve a writ out of the jurisdiction under Order 11, r 1(e) of the RSC on the ground that the claim was for breach of a contract within the jurisdiction. The breach alleged was of a CIF contract, and the allegation was that the contract was broken by reason of a failure to deliver in Liverpool the goods that were the subject of the contract. Leave was given ex parte and upheld inter partes. The plaintiffs now conceded that the way that their claim had been advanced had been misconceived in that a CIF contract involves an obligation to deliver documents, not the goods to which the documents relate. The plaintiffs tried to persuade the Court to uphold the leave given to serve out on the basis of substituting for the original claim a claim for failure to deliver the relevant documents in Liverpool.
Held: Permission was refused. A L Smith MR said: ‘It was not until the case came into this Court that the plaintiff set up another cause of action. That could not be allowed.’
Collins LJ said: ‘an application for leave to issue a writ for service out of the jurisdiction ought to be made with great care and looked at strictly. If a material representation upon which the leave was obtained in the first instance turned out to be unfounded, the plaintiff ought not to be allowed . . to set up another and a distinct cause of action which was not before the Judge upon the original application. It was clear from the affidavit that the only case made on the original application was that the defendants were bound to deliver the goods in this country, and that there was a breach of that contract here, and upon that representation alone leave was originally granted to issue the writ and serve notice thereof abroad.’
Romer LJ said: ‘an application for leave to issue a writ for service out of the jurisdiction ought to be made with great care and looked at strictly. If a material representation upon which the leave was obtained in the first instance turned out to be unfounded, the plaintiff ought not to be allowed, when an application was made by the defendant to discharge the order for the issue of the writ and the service, to set up another and a distinct cause of action which was not before the judge upon the original application.’

Judges:

A L Smith MR, Collins, Romer LJJ

Citations:

(1901) 17 TLR 299

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

To be confined to its facts – NML Capital Ltd v Argentina SC 6-Jul-2011
The respondent had issued bonds but in 2001 had declared a moratorium on paying them. The appellant hedge fund later bought the bonds, heavily discounted. Judgment was obtained in New York, which the appellants now sought to enforce against assets . .
Applied – Re Jogia (A Bankrupt) 1988
Application was made for leave to serve proceedings out of the jurisdiction in a claim for money had and received in connection with payments made to the defendant after a receiving order.
Held: A plaintiff who has been given permission to . .
Cited – Metall und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Inc CA 1990
There was a complicated commercial dispute involving allegations of conspiracy. A claim by the plaintiffs for inducing or procuring a breach of contract would have been statute-barred in New York.
Held: Slade LJ said: ‘The judge’s approach to . .
Cited – AB v CD QBD 3-Jan-2014
The parties were contracted to each other in respect of an internet based marketing system for metals and other resources. The claimant had contracted in effect to promote the system. The claimant sought an injunction to prevent termination of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Litigation Practice

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.441563

Byers and Others (Liquidators of Madoff Securities International Ltd) v Yacht Bull Corporation and Another: ChD 1 Feb 2010

The claimants asked the court to exercise jurisdiction over a yacht purchased by the defendant company incorporated and domiciled in France with money from the insolvent company.
Held: The court did not have jurisdiction. Article 2 of the regulation applied so as to require the matter to go before the courts in France. The exception in article 1(2)(b) did not apply so as to exclude application of the regulation.

Judges:

Sir Andrew Morritt, Chancellor

Citations:

[2010] BCC 368, [2010] ILPr 24, [2010] EWHC 133 (Ch), Times 15-Feb-2010, [2010] WLR (D) 18

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of December 22, 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction, Insolvency

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.396744

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

The deceased had died in an accident whilst filming in Spain for the defendants. The plaintiff personal representatives sought damages here, while the defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction under the 1968 Convention, and said that the death actually occurred as a consequence of the negligence of his medical treatment in Spain.

Judges:

Phillips J

Citations:

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

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Brussels Convention on Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments 1968, Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 1, Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982

Citing:

Cited – Haqen v Zeehaqhe ECJ 1990
ECJ ‘Article 6(2) makes provision for a special jurisdiction, which the Plaintiff may choose because of the existence, in clearly defined situations, of a particularly close connecting factor between a dispute . .
Cited – Somafer Sa v Saar-Ferngas Ag ECJ 22-Nov-1978
ECJ 1. The Convention of 27 September 1968 must be interpreted having regard both to its principles and objectives and to its relationship with the treaty. The question whether the words and concepts used in the . .
Cited – Kalfelis v Bankhaus Schroder, Munchmeyer, Hengst and Co and others ECJ 27-Sep-1988
ECJ For Article 6(1) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters to apply, a connection must exist between the various actions brought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Personal Injury

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.383805

Channel Tunnel Group Ltd and Another v Balfour Beatty Construction Ltd and Others: CA 1 Apr 1992

The arbitration agreement specified that disputes were to be arbitrated in Brussels, therefore there was no jurisdiction in an English court.

Citations:

Gazette 01-Apr-1992

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1950 12 (6) (h)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Channel Tunnel Group Ltd v Balfour Beatty Construction Ltd and Others HL 17-Feb-1993
The court has the power to stay an action which pursued a remedy which was outside the terms of the arbitration agreement determining the dispute. The contract between the parties provided for disputes to be settled by arbitration in Belgium. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Jurisdiction

Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.78975

Deutsche Bank Ag v Sebastian Holdings Inc: ComC 14 Aug 2009

Judges:

Walker J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2132 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Deutsche Bank Ag v Sebastian Holdings Inc ComC 1-Dec-2009
. .
See Also – Deutsche Bank Ag v Sebastian Holdings Inc ComC 28-Apr-2016
. .
See Also – Deutsche Bank Ag v Sebastian Holdings Inc ComC 16-Dec-2016
. .
See Also – Deutsche Bank Ag v Sebastian Holdings Inc ComC 13-Dec-2017
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.372696

Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Sportradar Gmbh and Another: CA 29 Mar 2011

Matter referred to ECJ. The claimants sougt to restraiin alleged breach of database rights by the defendants in lists of Football League fixtures.

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 330

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Sportradar Gmbh and Another ChD 17-Nov-2010
The claimants complained of alleged breach of database rights claimed by the claimants in their lists of football match schedules. . .

Cited by:

At CA – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Sportradar Gmbh and Another ChD 8-May-2012
. .
Reference – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Sportradar Gmbh and Another ECJ 21-Jun-2012
ECJ (Opinion) Directive 96/9/EC – Legal protection of databases – Concepts of extraction and re-utilisation – Location of the act of re-utilisation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.431246

Hatzl and Another v XL Insurance Company Ltd: CA 19 Mar 2009

The claimant had taken an assignment of a cause of action from an english lorry driver whose load had been stolen in Italy. The insurer now appealed against a finding that the English court had jurisdiction.
Held: The insurers appeal succeeded. The Convention was not effective to give the court jurisdiction merely because one party was domiciled here.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rix, Lord Justice Jacob and Lord Justice Lawrence Collins

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 223, Times 16-Mar-2009, [2010] 1 WLR 470, [2009] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 555, [2010] Bus LR 50, [2009] 3 All ER 617, [2009] 1 CLC 360

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road 56, Carriage of Goods By Road Act 1965

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – British American Tobacco Denmark A/S v Kazemier Bv SC 28-Oct-2015
One container loaded with cigarettes was allegedly hi-jacked in Belgium en route between Switzerland and The Netherlands in September 2011, while another allegedly lost 756 of its original 1386 cartons while parked overnight contrary to express . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Jurisdiction

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.323704

Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Emmott: ComC 6 Nov 2008

Challenge to jurisdiction of arbitration proceedings.

Judges:

Teare J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2684 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Emmott v Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd CA 12-Mar-2008
The court considered the implication of the obligation of confidentiality in banking contracts or in arbitration agreements. It is ‘really a rule of substantive law masquerading as an implied term’. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Emmott v Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd ComC 12-Jan-2009
The claimant, a party to an arbitration, sought first an order requiring the defendant to comply with an order made by the arbitrator for the transfer of certain shares, and second an asset freezing order.
Held: The conditions for a peremptory . .
See Also – Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Emmott ComC 8-Jun-2011
The claimant challenged an arbitration award made concerning the agreement under which the defendant had been admitted to partnership. MWP contended that the Tribunal were guilty of a large number of serious irregularities in their conduct of the . .
See Also – Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Sinclair and Others ComC 21-Sep-2012
The claimant company alleged that the defendants had variously received assests (shares and cash) acquired by a former partner in the claimant company and held on his behalf, in breach of his obligations to the caimant partnership. The defendants . .
See Also – Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Sinclair and Others CA 16-Jan-2013
Application to stay order for costs. . .
See Also – Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Sinclair and Others CA 23-Jul-2015
. .
See Also – Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Emmott CA 14-Oct-2015
Appeal against a finding that payments made by the appellant were made in the ordinary course of business and not in breach of a freezing injunction. . .
See Also – Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Emmott CA 11-Dec-2015
The court considered a residual jurisdiction to set aside an arbitrator’s award after a first appeal. . .
See Also – Emmott v Michael Wilson and Partners ComC 24-Nov-2016
Application for an anti-suit injunction against the defendant to restrain it from taking any further steps in ongoing proceedings in New South Wales and from commencing or pursuing any other substantive claims against the claimant on the ground that . .
See Also – Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Sinclair and Another CA 13-Jan-2017
The appellant company sought to recover assets which, it said, had been acquired by a former partner in breach of his obligations under the partnership agreement, but which had been taken in the names of some of the respondents. There had been an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Arbitration

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277570

Youell and others v La Reunion Aerienne and others: ComC 22 Oct 2008

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2493 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Youell and others v La Reunion Aerienne and others CA 11-Mar-2009
The parties disputed whether the court had jurisdiction. The defendant insurer argued that parallel issues had been referred to arbitration in France.
Held: the claim was outside the range of the arbitration agreement, and a stay, which would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Jurisdiction

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277340

Dexter Ltd (In Administrative Receivership) v Harley: ChD 2 Apr 2001

Money was transferred wrongfully out of the company, and then on again into the hands of the respondent. She received the money, and knew of its fraudulent provenance, but all her acts were committed outside the jurisdiction.
Held: It was not sufficient that the original act in breach of trust occurred within the jurisdiction, the claimant had to show that some act of the defendant had occurred here, if she was to be sued here.

Citations:

Times 02-Apr-2001

Statutes:

Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (1968) (Cmnd 7395)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Trusts, Banking, Jurisdiction

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.79951

HC Trading Malta Ltd v Tradeland Commodities Sl: ComC 2 Jun 2016

Application by the defendant to set aside the claim for declaratory relief made against it by the claimant and/or to set aside service out of the jurisdiction.

Judges:

Waksman C HHJ

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1279 (Comm), [2016] WLR(D) 295

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction, Contract

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.565185

Glencore International Ag v Exter Shipping Ltd and others: CA 18 Apr 2002

The court was asked whether there is jurisdiction in the English court to impose an anti-suit injunction against four foreign shipowners in respect of their complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The shipowners have participated in complex multi-party litigation in England, known as the Metro litigation, but they submit that, partly because their participation was always limited and partly because over time that participation has been still further eroded by settlement and discontinuance, the English court lacks jurisdiction to make the order complained of.

Judges:

Rix LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 528, [2002] CLC 1090, [2002] 2 All ER (Comm) 1

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258651

AWB (Geneva) SA and Another v North America Steamships Ltd and Another: CA 18 Jul 2007

A swap agreement provided that pursuant to the ISDA Master Agreement, the agreement was governed by English law and subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts. The trustee of one of the parties brought statutory avoidance proceedings in Canada. The Court of Appeal refused to grant an anti-suit injunction, because the choice of law and choice of jurisdiction agreement did not apply to the insolvency proceedings. The proceedings in Canada did not relate to a dispute under the contract. They were part of insolvency proceedings. It was a matter for the Canadian Court to decide on the relief that it is prepared to grant within the scope of those proceedings as it is concerned with issues of insolvency and not with issues which relate to the contractual obligations under the agreement.

Judges:

Chadwick LJ, Latham LJ, Thomas LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 739, [2007] 2 Lloyds Rep 315

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – AWB Geneva Sa and Another v North America Steamships Ltd ComC 17-May-2007
Whether a party to a contract governed by English law and subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English High Court can found on these provisions to restrain the counterparty’s foreign trustee in bankruptcy from seeking an order in foreign . .

Cited by:

Cited – Vizcaya Partners Ltd v Picard and Another PC 3-Feb-2016
No Contractual Obligation to Try Case in New York
(Gibraltar) The appellant had invested in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff. They were repaid sums before the fund collapsed, and the trustees now sought repayment by way of enforcement of an order obtained in New York.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Contract, Insolvency

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.254599

AWB Geneva Sa and Another v North America Steamships Ltd: ComC 17 May 2007

Whether a party to a contract governed by English law and subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English High Court can found on these provisions to restrain the counterparty’s foreign trustee in bankruptcy from seeking an order in foreign insolvency proceedings that certain conditions precedent to liability under the contract should cease to apply.

Judges:

Field J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1167 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Appeal from – AWB (Geneva) SA and Another v North America Steamships Ltd and Another CA 18-Jul-2007
A swap agreement provided that pursuant to the ISDA Master Agreement, the agreement was governed by English law and subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts. The trustee of one of the parties brought statutory avoidance . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Jurisdiction, Insolvency

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.252439

Benatti v WPP Holdings Italy Srl and others: CA 28 Mar 2007

The parties had each begun proceedings in different jurisdictions within the European Union. They disputed which court was first seised.
Held: The issue was decided by looking at when, in each case, the document instituting the proceedings was first lodged at court. Different jurisdictions within the Union had different procedures, but article 30 of the Judgments Order applied to the UK. There was no injustice in applying that rule.
Sir Anthony Clarke MR explained at that WPP’s case was that the writ lodged with the relevant Italian body with a request for service on 1 February 2006 was never validly served on it both because the letter purporting to serve it was addressed to a different entity (WPP Group plc) and also because the addressee was entitled to refuse to accept it without a translation. The time for refusal was unspecified and it was submitted that it therefore remained open to the defendant (unless there had been a prior positive act of acceptance) to intimate its refusal as long as it remained open to it to contest the court’s jurisdiction under CPR 11. These technical nit-picking arguments were dismissed; Mr Benatti was not blameworthy and the errors were excused.

Judges:

Sir Anthony Clarke MR, Buxton LJ, Toulson LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 263, Times 16-Apr-2007

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 (OJ 2001 L12/1) 30(1) 30(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Wpp Holdings Italy Srl and others v Benatti ComC 18-Jul-2006
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Thum v Thum FC 21-Oct-2016
No abuse of process in service error
The husband claimed that the W was guilty of abuse of process by issuing the divorce petion, but then not serving it for many months in an attempt to gain a tactical jurisdictional advantage under Brussels II.
Held: H’s application was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.250577

Sandisk Corporation v Koninklijke Philips Electronics Nv and others: ChD 27 Feb 2007

The claimant sought damages for an alleged abuse of dominant market position by the defendants in its patent licensing. The defendant denied that the court had jurisdiction.
Held: An English court would have jurisdiction in such a case ony if the originating acts occurred here, of the damages substantially happened here.

Judges:

Pumfrey J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 332 (Ch), Times 27-Feb-2007

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Treaty 81 82

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice, Jurisdiction, European

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.249239

Ravennavi Spa v New Century Shipbuilding Company Ltd: CA 7 Feb 2007

Moore Bick LJ considered the interpretation of poorly drafted contracts and said: ‘Unless the dispute concerns a detailed document of a complex nature that can properly be assumed to have been carefully drafted to ensure that its provisions dovetail neatly, detailed linguistic analysis is unlikely to yield a reliable answer. It is far preferable, in my view, to read the words in question fairly as a whole in the context of the document as a whole and in the light of the commercial and factual background known to both parties in order to ascertain what they were intending to achieve.’

Judges:

Tuckey, Jacob, Moore-Bick LLJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 58, [2007] 1 CLC 176, [2007] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 24, [2007] 2 All ER (Comm) 756

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Ravennavi Spa v New Century Shipbuilding Company Ltd ComC 4-Apr-2006
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Multi-Link Leisure Developments Ltd v Lanarkshire Council SC 17-Nov-2010
The parties disputed the effect of an option clause in a lease, and particularly whether, when fixing the price, potential for development was to be included. The clause required the ‘full market value’ to be paid. The tenant appealed.
Held: . .
Cited – Garratt v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd CA 13-Apr-2011
The claimant had been employed by the defendant. They made him redundant. He claimed and enhanced payment saying that his emloyment was covered by a collective agreement, but when he refused to sign a compromise agreement, the company paid him only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Jurisdiction

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.248385

Berezovsky and Another v Forbes Inc and Another: QBD 19 Jan 1998

A defamation action which between two parties both resident in foreign jurisdictions but based upon a publication with a circulation of 2000 in Britain was to be stayed.

Citations:

Times 19-Jan-1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Berezovsky and Glouchkov v Forbes Inc and Michaels CA 31-Jul-2001
The claimant sought damages from the defendant for a magazine article claiming that he was involved in organised crime in Russia. The defendants appealed against the striking out of elements of the defence suggesting lesser meanings. Was meaning a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Jurisdiction

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.78347

Speed Investments Limited, Slec Holdings LImited v Formula One Holdings Limited, Bambino Holdings Limited, Luc Argand, Emmanuele Argand-Rey: CA 12 Nov 2004

The applicants, shareholders in the company, sought to stay an action in England, saying the action had first been commenced in Switzerland.
Held: The issue was one of the internal management of the company. Though it did not relate to a matter of the constitution of the company it did relate to a shareholders agreement which concerned one of the main organs of the company. The company was registered in the UK, and the action should be heard here. The stay was refused.

Judges:

The Hon Mr Justice Neuberger Lord Justice Aldous Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1512, Times 18-Nov-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Lugano Convention 21

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Speed Investments Ltd and Another v Formula One Holdings Limited and Others (No 2) ChD 20-Jul-2004
The defendants sought a stay of the action, arguing that proceedings had begun first in Switzerland.
Held: An English court became seised of an action for the purposes of the Convention at the time when the proceedings were served. Under the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Company

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.219648

Shahar 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 this way.
Held: The defendant should apply to the court for leave to add the party outside the jurisdiction, and the claim allowed would be treated as a counterclaim within Rule 20.

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2659 (Ch), Times 30-Nov-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 20

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Gardner v Parker CA 25-Jun-2004
The court considered the extent to which a shareholder or creditor of a company who has suffered loss, as the result of a breach of duties owed both to him and the company by a defendant, is nonetheless debarred from recovering that loss, because . .
Cited – Giles v Rhind ChD 24-Jul-2001
The company had suffered losses after an alleged breach of confidence by a director. The applicant sought to recover his losses as a shareholder, after the company became unable or unwilling itself to pursue an action to recover the losses it had . .
Cited – Kleinwort Benson Limited v City of Glasgow District Council HL 19-Jun-1997
Restitution when Contract Void ab initio
A claim for restitution of money paid under a contract which was void ab initio is not a claim in contract, nor tort, nor delict, it was justiciable only in the court of domicile. The Brussels Convention does not decide jurisdiction. ‘But it is . .
Cited – Kalfelis v Bankhaus Schroder, Munchmeyer, Hengst and Co and others ECJ 27-Sep-1988
ECJ For Article 6(1) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters to apply, a connection must exist between the various actions brought . .
Cited – Reunion Europeenne Sa and Others v Spliethoff’s Bevrachtingskantoor Bv and Another ECJ 27-Oct-1998
French consignees of a shipment of peaches sued in France the Australian issuers of the bill of laiding under which the goods were carried (a contract claim) and the Dutch carriers and master of the ship in which they were carried (tort claims).
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Handelswerkerij GJ Bier BV v Mines de Potasse d’Alsace SA ECJ 1976
The Dutch plaintiff claimed that the water supply to its nursery had been polluted by the French defendant’s discharge of waste into the Rhine in France.
Held: The meaning of the expression: ‘Place where the harmful event occurred’ must be . .

Cited by:

Cited – Islamic 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.219548

Martin Peters Bauunternehmung Gmbh v Zuid Nederlandse Aannemers Vereniging: ECJ 22 Mar 1983

1. The concept of matters relating to a contract in article 5(1) of the convention of 27 september 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters should not be interpreted simply as referring to the national law of one or other of the member states concerned, but should be regarded as an independent concept which, for the purposes of the application of the convention, must be interpreted by reference chiefly to the system and objectives of the convention, in order to ensure that it is fully effective.
2. Obligations in regard to the payment of a sum of money which have their basis in the relationship existing between an association and its members by virtue of membership are ‘matters relating to a contract’ within the meaning of article 5(1) of the convention, whether the obligations in question arise simply from the act of becoming a member or from that act in conjunction with one or more decisions made by organs of the association.

Citations:

[1983] ECR 987, [1983] EUECJ R-34/82, [1984] 2 CMLR 605

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Jurisdiction

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215149

L G Caltex Gas Co Ltd v National Petroleum Corporation and Another: CA 15 May 2001

Section 67(1)(a) applies both when a tribunal finds that it has jurisdiction and also when it declines jurisdiction. The respondent said that an informal agreement with the claimant to allow jurisdiction was limited to certain issues only. While an arbitral tribunal is entitled to determine whether it has jurisdiction, its decision on that issue is not binding on the parties.

Judges:

Lord Phillips MR, Pill, Keene LJJ

Citations:

[2001] 2 All ER (Comm) 97, [2001] EWCA Civ 788, [2001] CLC 1392, [2001] BLR 325, [2001] 4 All ER 875, (2001) 3 TCLR 22, [2001] 1 WLR 1892

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1996 67 73

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction, Arbitration

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.201061

Tryg Baltic International (UK) Ltd v Boston Compania De Seguros Sa and others: ComC 28 May 2004

Four defendants from Argentina sought to have set aside an order for them to be served, saying the appropriate jursidiction, if there was a triable issue, would be Argentina.
Held: The agreements were to be construed according to English Law. There was an advantage in settling these issues in advance of pessification. ‘Where points of construction of English law are involved, particularly those which involve Reinsurance with conditions precedent, ‘full reinsurance’ clauses and ‘follow the settlements’ clauses, the natural expectation of the parties must be for the English Courts to resolve such matters. ‘

Judges:

Cooke The Honourable Mr Justice Cooke

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1186 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – The Zephyr 1984
Whilst it is possible to make a contract which is partly oral and partly written, that is not the practice of the marine insurance market. The policy is the formal contractual document issued to the assured and unequivocally contains the terms of . .
Cited – Credit Lyonnais v New Hampshire Insurance Company CA 12-Mar-1997
Whether two policies of insurance were governed by English or French law. . .
Cited – Volvox Hollandia 1998
. .
Cited – Messier-Dowty Ltd and Another v Sabena Sa and Others CA 21-Feb-2000
The defendants sought a declaration that they would not be liable in respect of their potential involvement in a pending action. The appellants asserted that such a declaration could not be granted since no proceedings were yet in issue. The court . .
Cited – New Hampshire Insurance Company and others v Phillips Electronics North America Corporation CA 16-May-1997
In the context of applications for negative declarations: ‘1. There is power to grant a negative declaration in an appropriate case, the fundamental test being whether it would be useful. 2. However, careful scrutiny will be exercised not only to . .
Cited – Forsikringsaktieselskapt Vesta v Butcher HL 1988
A contract of insurance and a facultative reinsurance, under which part of the original risk was reinsured, contained warranties in identical terms.
Held: The warranty in the reinsurance policy, which was governed by English law, should be . .
Cited – Groupama Navigation Et Transports; Continent Sa; Mutuelles Du Mans; Zurich International France SA and Gie Generali Transports (Bodies Corporate) v V Catatumbo Seguros (a Body Corporate) CA 20-Jul-2000
. .
Cited – Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd, The Spiliada HL 1986
Forum Non Conveniens Restated
The House reviewed the authorities on the principle of forum non conveniens and restated how to apply the principle where the defendant seeks a stay of proceedings on the ground that there is another more appropriate forum.
Held: ‘In the . .
Cited – The Nile Rhapsody ComC 1992
. .
Cited – Baker v Black Sea and Baltic General Insurance Co Ltd HL 20-May-1998
The question agreed to be before the court was ‘Where an insurer incurs costs in investigating settling or defending claims by his insured, can the insurer recover a proportion of these costs under a quota share or other form of proportional . .
Cited – The Nile Rhapsody CA 1994
. .
Cited – CGU v Szabo 2002
. .
Cited – Munchener Ruckversicherungsgesellschaft (Trading As Munich Reinsurance Company) v Commonwealth Insurance Company ComC 28-Apr-2004
Challenge to leave to serve proceedings on Canadian defendant. . .
Cited – The Lincoln National Life Insurance Co v Employers Reinsurance Corporation ComC 5-Feb-2002
. .
Cited – Prifti and others v Musini Sociedad Anonima De Seguros Y Reaseguros ComC 21-Nov-2003
‘It is argued that because the subject matter of the Reinsurance was a Spanish risk, the commercial context of the . . Reinsurance suggests in the absence of an express jurisdiction agreement, that the parties intended the Spanish Courts to have . .
Cited – Siporex Trade SA v Comdel Commodities 1986
The court should not absolve a defaulting party from the consequences of its neglect by maintaining a Mareva injunction order in force. . .
Cited – The Giovanna 1999
Non-disclosure by applicant for interim relief . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.197932

Tavoulareas v Tsavliris: CA 5 Feb 2004

The court held that Greek proceedings required service for the purposes of establishing seisin, and therefore priority of jurisdiction. Mance LJ said: ‘Professor Antapassis says that, as a matter of Greek domestic law, the effect of art. 221 is that proceedings may be considered pending retrospectively from the date of filing of the writ, once service has been effected . . However, it is impossible to accept that the Greek proceedings were, for the purposes of art. 21 of the Brussels Convention, definitively pending from Nov. 8, 2001 (when they were filed). Article 21 requires a simple chronological approach, which is inconsistent with retrospectivity. That is obvious in principle, and was stated in Dresser, where Lord Justice Bingham said: ‘Some tie-break rule was necessary, and that adopted by the Convention was a simple test of chronological priority.”

Judges:

The Hon Mr Justice Evans-Lombe, Lord Justice Mance, Lord Justice Thorpe

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 48, [2004] 1 Lloyds Rep 445

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Brussels Convention 21

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Tavoulareas v Tsavliris and others ComC 21-Mar-2003
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Tavoulareas v Tsavliris and Another ComC 12-Oct-2005
. .
See Also – Tavoulareas v Alexander G Tsavliris and Sons Maritime Company ComC 24-Nov-2005
. .
See Also – Tavoulareas v Tsavliris and others ComC 9-Mar-2006
Formal recognition of judgment from Greek court. . .
Cited – Nussberger and Another v Phillips and Another (No 4) CA 19-May-2006
A claim was issued in London in December 2004, and then served in part in Switzerland in January 2005. One copy was removed from the bundle by a Swiss official, seeing that it had been marked ‘Nor for service out of the jurisdiction.’ That marking . .
Cited – Thum v Thum FC 21-Oct-2016
No abuse of process in service error
The husband claimed that the W was guilty of abuse of process by issuing the divorce petion, but then not serving it for many months in an attempt to gain a tactical jurisdictional advantage under Brussels II.
Held: H’s application was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.192641

Don King v Lennox Lewis, Lion Promotions, LLC Judd Burstein: QBD 6 Feb 2004

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 168 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Lewis and others v King CA 19-Oct-2004
The claimant sought damages for defamation for an article published on the Internet. The claimant Don King sued in London even though he lived in the US as did the defendants.
Held: A publication via the internet occurred when the material was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Jurisdiction

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.192660

Staines v Walsh, Howard: ChD 14 Mar 2003

The claimant sought an account from the defendant share broker for the proceeds of share transactions. The defendant said the matter should be tried in Hong Kong.
Held: The claimant must show a good arguable case. Here there was evidence to support the claimant’s assertion of the use of an address in England, and a case was therefore shown. There were clear English connections, and the contract was asserted to have been made in England. England was the forum conveniens.

Judges:

The Hon Mr Justice Goldring

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 458 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 6.20, Contracts (Applicable Law) Act 1990, Rome Convention 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Canada Trust Company and others v Stolzenberg and others (2) CA 29-Oct-1997
The court looked at questions relating to domicile and jurisdiction; standard of proof, date to be determined and duties before service.
Held: The court is endeavouring to find an imprecise concept which reflects that the plaintiff must . .
Cited – Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd, The Spiliada HL 1986
Forum Non Conveniens Restated
The House reviewed the authorities on the principle of forum non conveniens and restated how to apply the principle where the defendant seeks a stay of proceedings on the ground that there is another more appropriate forum.
Held: ‘In the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Civil Procedure Rules, Contract

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179918

Wermuth v Wermuth: CA 4 Feb 2003

The husband had commenced proceedings for divorce in Germany. The husband was German, and the wife became German upon the marriage, but they had lived in London. The wife was second to issue, beginning proceedings in London. The district judge recorded the parties’ agreement that the German court should be seized, save of article 12 matters. The wife obtained an ancillary relief maintenance order, which the husband now appealed.
Held: The maintenance order was an unwarranted invasion of the jurisdiction of the German court. It was not protective, and nor was the case urgent. Brussels II has no direct application to ancillary relief claims. It was wrong for an English court to seek to usurp the Convention. Substantial sums had been spent on legal costs unnecessarily in London.

Judges:

Thorpe, Latham, LJJ, Lawrence Collins J

Citations:

Times 07-Feb-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 50, [2003] 1 WLR 942

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation No 1347/2000/EC (OJ 2000 L160/19) 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Jurisdiction, European

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179018

Kenburn Waste Management Ltd v Bergmann: ChD 9 Jul 2001

By a contract, a party accepted an obligation not to contact persons in a certain country. When a breach was alleged, the question arose as to in which jurisdiction the breach had occurred. It was held that the obligation was a negative obligation and although it appeared to fall upon the person who agreed to it, in fact any breach would occur in the country where the person contacted was situated. The result of this was that although the defendant lived in Germany, the place of effective or characteristic performance was in the UK, and it was under the convention more closely lined to the UK and could be tried here. The proviso in the later subsection applied.

Citations:

Times 09-Jul-2001

Statutes:

Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982, Brussels Convention on Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968 Art 4(2) 4(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Kenburn Waste Management Ltd v Bergmann CA 30-Jan-2002
The claimant had failed to obtain an order under a compromise agreement ordering that a foreign resident was not to be contacted.
Held: The place of performance of an obligation not to contact somebody under the Convention was the place of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.82729

Handelsveem Bv and Others v Coreck Maritime GmbH: ECJ 1 Dec 2000

When a court looked at a choice of the jurisdiction clause, it was not necessary that the clause should withoutmore establish the jurisdiction. A clause could be effective where the forum will be ascertainable at the time by reference to a the circumstances. In this case of the clause required a dispute under a bill of lading to be decided in the country where the carrier had his principal place of business. The requirement under the convention, that the parties should have should of ‘agreed’ the jurisdiction was satisfied where they had agreed a method of establishing it. The Brussels convention applied only if, first, at least one of the parties to the original contract was domiciled in the contracting state and, second, the parties agreed to submit any dispute before the Court of a contracting state.
‘The Court has held that, by making the validity of a jurisdiction clause subject to the existence of an ‘agreement’ between the parties, article 17 of the Convention imposes on the court before which the matter is brought the duty of examining first whether the clause conferring jurisdiction upon it was in fact the subject of consensus between the parties, which must be clearly and precisely demonstrated, and that the purpose of the requirements as to form imposed by article 17 is to ensure that consensus between the parties is in fact established . . ‘

Citations:

Times 01-Dec-2000, C-387/98, [2000] ECR I-9337, [2000] EUECJ C-387/98

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Bols Distilleries VB (T/A As Bols Royal Distilleries) and Another v Superior Yacht Services Ltd PC 11-Oct-2006
(Gilbraltar) The parties disputed the management contract for a racing yacht, and also the juridiction of the Supreme Court of Gibraltar to hear the case. Bols said that under regulation 2(1) Gibraltar had no jurisdiction.
Held: The English . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Transport, European

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.81216

Michael Gayle v the Queen (Jamaica): PC 2 Jul 1996

The judicial Committee of the Privy-Council is not to be used as second court of appeal on matters of fact.

Citations:

Times 02-Jul-1996, Appeal No 40 of 1995, Appeal No 40 of 1995, [1996] UKPC 3, [1996] UKPC 18, [2012] ECHR 1636, [2012] ECHR 1635, [2012] ECHR 1637, [1990] ECHR 34, [2009] ECHR 619, [1980] ECHR 9, [1997] ECHR 205, [2014] ECHR 293, [1978] ECHR 8, [2010] ECHR 2263, [1994] ECHR 59, [2011] ECHR 2422, [1985] ECHR 14, [2016] ECHR 699, [2016] ECHR 704, [2016] ECHR 986, [2017] ECHR 32

Links:

PC, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction, Criminal Practice, Commonwealth

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80774

Domicrest Ltd v Swiss Bank Corporation: QBD 7 Jul 1998

An English claimant sued a Swiss bank for a negligent mis-statement made in a telephone call between England and Switzerland. The Swiss banker represented that the transmission of a copy payment order by the bank to the claimant was a guarantee that payment would be made for the amount referred. The claimant relied on the representations to release goods in Switzerland and Italy on receipt of the copy payment order from the bank rather than waiting until it had been paid. The bank refused to pay on three copy payments orders in respect of goods which had been released from store in Switzerland and Italy.
Held: The place of the damage was in Switzerland and Italy, where the goods were released without payment, rather than England, where the Swiss purchaser would have paid the price. The reasons for that finding were (a) that it was by reference to the loss of the goods that the damages were pleaded; and (b) that the essence of the complaint was that the goods were released prior to payment. Where negligent misstatement is alleged, the law governing the action is that of the country where the statement was made. The tortious act occurs when the statement is made not when and where the statement is relied upon.

Citations:

Times 16-Jul-1998, [1999] QB 548, [1998] EWHC 2001 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1988

Cited by:

Cited – Mazur Media Limited and Another v Mazur Media Gmbh in Others ChD 8-Jul-2004
Proceedings were brought in England. The respondents sought a stay, saying the company was subject to insolvency proceedings in Germany.
Held: Our domestic insolvency law was not applicable to foreign proceedings, and so could not be used to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Negligence

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80090

D v P (Forum Conveniens): FD 7 Oct 1998

Where parties had divorced here, but had previously entered into a separation agreement abroad, it was proper to stay the ancillary relief proceedings here, and prefer the jurisdiction where the agreement had been made.

Citations:

Gazette 07-Oct-1998, [1998] 2 FLR 25

Cited by:

Cited – Moore v Moore CA 20-Apr-2007
The family were wealthy, and had lived for some time in Spain. On the breakdown of the marriage, the wife returned to the UK, and sought ancillary relief here, though the divorce had been in Spain. The husband argued that this should be dealt with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Jurisdiction

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79765

C Inc Plc v L and Another: QBD 4 May 2001

The plaintiff had obtained judgment against L, only then to find that she claimed that all only apparent assets were held by her on trust for or as agent for her husband who was overseas. The plaintiff therefore now set out to add him, and to claim an asset freezing injunction against him.
Held: The court had power to order the assets of that third party to be frozen, even though they were not a party to the action, and no judgment existed against them. The court also has power to order him to be joined as a party, rather than for proceedings to be issued against him. Even though judgment had been obtained, the parties remained in dispute as to the means of payment, and that dispute remained part of the original proceedings. The word ‘proceedings’ in rule 19(2) should be interpreted widely and extend to circumstances where judgment had been obtained but not yet satisfied. The rule did not require that the disputed issue should be as between the existing parties. The court had the power to join the third party. The purpose of an asset freezing order ‘remains the protection of assets so as to provide a fund to meet a judgment obtained by the claimant in the English Courts’.
The court considered the effect of the decision in Cardile: ‘It seems to me that the High Court of Australia has stated that, in Australia, the assets of a third party can be frozen in aid of enforcing a pending or actual judgment, even where those assets are not beneficially owned by the actual or potential judgment debtor. The necessary precondition for power to make a freezing order over the third party’s assets is that the actual or potential judgment creditor should have some legal right to get at the third party’s funds. However, on my reading of the judgments, particularly pars. 57 and 121, the High Court of Australia is stating that there must be some casual link between the fact that the claimant has obtained a judgment against the principal defendant and thus has a legal right, as a consequence of the liability giving rise to the judgment, to go against the assets of the third party. I will delay deciding whether English law permits the exercise of the freezing order jurisdiction where there is such a casual link until I have considered the remaining two factors I have identified. ‘
and ‘If there is a claim for substantive relief by A against B (whether or not in the English Court), or A has obtained a judgment against B (in the English Court), then the English Court can grant a freezing order against the assets of C. But, generally, it must be arguable that those assets, even if in C’s name, are, in fact, beneficially owned by B.
The crucial question is whether the Court can go one stage further. Does it have the power to grant a freezing order against the assets of C when: (i) A has a substantive right against B (e.g. in the form of a judgment); (ii) the assets of C are not, even arguably, beneficially owned by B. The answer, to my mind, depends on how one interprets the phrases ‘ancillary’ and ‘incidental to and dependent upon’ used by Lords Browne-Wilkinson and Mustill in the Channel Tunnel case. In the Cardile case the High Court of Australia has, effectively, given those phrases a broad interpretation. But, critically, the High Court of Australia held that the right of A to a freezing order against C is dependent upon A having a right against B and that right itself giving rise to a right that B can exercise against C and its assets. Therefore the freezing order sought by A against C is ‘incidental to’ A’s substantive right against B and it is also ‘dependent upon’ that right.’

Judges:

Aikens J

Citations:

Times 04-May-2001, [2001] 2 Lloyds Law Reports 459, [2001] 2 All ER (Comm) 446

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 19.4(2)(a), 6.30(2), 6.20(3)

Citing:

Cited – Cardile v LED Builders PTY Limited 1999
(High Court of Australia) The respondent (‘LED’) twice sought relief from Eagle Homes PTY Limited (‘Eagle’) for copyright infringement. Anticipating the proceedings the only shareholders and controllers of Eagle, the claimants arranged the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Siskina (owners of Cargo lately on Board) v Distos Compania Naviera SA HL 1979
An injunction was sought against a Panamanian ship-owning company to restrain it from disposing of a fund, consisting of insurance proceeds, in England. The claimant for the injunction was suing the company in a Cyprus court for damages and believed . .
Cited – HM Revenue and Customs v Egleton and others ChD 19-Sep-2006
The claimants had applied for the winding up of a company for very substantial sums of VAT due to it. Anticipating that hearing, it now sought restraining orders against the director defendants, alleging that there had been a carousel or missing . .
Cited – Trade Credit Finance No Ltd and Another v Bilgin and others ComC 3-Nov-2004
. .
Cited – Messer Griesheim Gmbh v Goyal Mg Gases Pvt Ltd ComC 7-Feb-2006
The claimant sought to have set aside its own judgment obtained by default so as to apply for a second judgment. The first would not be enforceable abroad against the defendant, because a default judgment was not enforceable in India. The second . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Litigation Practice

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78800

Emanuel v Symon: CA 1908

Kennedy LJ confirmedtaht the Faridkote case had decided of a suggested obligation to submit to a foreign jurisdiction that it: ‘was not to be implied from the mere fact of entering into a contract in a foreign country’.

Judges:

Kennedy LJ

Citations:

[1908] 1 KB 302

Citing:

Cited – Sirdar Gurdyal Singh v The Rajah of Faridkote PC 28-Jul-1894
(Punjab) THe Rajah of Faridkote had obtained in the Civil Court of Faridkote (a native state) ex parte judgments against Singh (his former treasurer), which he sought to enforce in Lahore, in British India. Singh was not then resident in Faridkote . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.565132

Copin v Adamson: CA 1875

The plaintiff sought to enforce here a judgment obtained in France against the defendant, who now pleaded that he was not a native of and had not lived in France. He had not been served with any process or had any involvement in or knowledge of the proceedings in France. The plaintiff said that he owned shares in a French company which made him subject to its statutes which in turn provided for French law and jurisdiction on related disputes, and that any member must elect a French domicile, or that election could be made for it. The company having become insolvent, he was now pursued for the subscription promised.
Held: The reply was effective even though he had hadno notice of the proceedings: ‘The Courts of this country consider the defendant bound . . where he has contracted to submit himself to the forum in which the judgment was obtained.’

Citations:

(1875) 1 Ex D 17, (1875) 45 LJQB 15, (1875) 33 LT 560, (1875) WR 85

Cited by:

Cited – Vizcaya Partners Ltd v Picard and Another PC 3-Feb-2016
No Contractual Obligation to Try Case in New York
(Gibraltar) The appellant had invested in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff. They were repaid sums before the fund collapsed, and the trustees now sought repayment by way of enforcement of an order obtained in New York.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.565110

Jamieson v Northern Electricity Supply Corp (Private) Ltd: 1970

It was argued that there had been an implied submission to the Zambian courts by an employee because the contract of employment was entered into in, and to be performed in Zambia, and assumed to be governed by Zambian law, and that a Azambian judgement on the matter should be enforced.
Held: Lord Johnston (at 116) took the view that a submission was not lightly to be implied, and could not be implied from a conjunction of those factors. Registration of the Zambian judgment was set aside because the 1933 Act did not apply to Zambia.

Judges:

Lord Johnston

Citations:

1970 SLT 113

Cited by:

Cited – Vizcaya Partners Ltd v Picard and Another PC 3-Feb-2016
No Contractual Obligation to Try Case in New York
(Gibraltar) The appellant had invested in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff. They were repaid sums before the fund collapsed, and the trustees now sought repayment by way of enforcement of an order obtained in New York.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Jurisdiction

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.565131

SA Consortium General Textiles v Sun and Sand Agencies Ltd: CA 1978

The expression ‘agreed . . to submit to the jurisdiction’ in the 1933 Act meant ‘expressed willingness or consented to or acknowledged that he would accept the jurisdiction of the foreign court. It does not require that the judgment debtor must have bound himself contractually or in formal terms so to do’

Judges:

Goff LJ

Citations:

[1978] QB 279

Statutes:

Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933 4(2)(a)(ii)

Cited by:

Cited – Vizcaya Partners Ltd v Picard and Another PC 3-Feb-2016
No Contractual Obligation to Try Case in New York
(Gibraltar) The appellant had invested in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff. They were repaid sums before the fund collapsed, and the trustees now sought repayment by way of enforcement of an order obtained in New York.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.565133

National Bank of Greece SA v Westminster Bank Executor and Trustee Co (Channel Islands) Ltd: 1971

Judges:

Lord Hailsham LC

Citations:

[1971] AC 945

Cited by:

Cited – NML Capital Ltd v Argentina SC 6-Jul-2011
The respondent had issued bonds but in 2001 had declared a moratorium on paying them. The appellant hedge fund later bought the bonds, heavily discounted. Judgment was obtained in New York, which the appellants now sought to enforce against assets . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.441569

The Bank of Australasia v Harding: 1850

The members, resident in England, of a company formed for the purpose of carrying on business in a place out of England, are bound, in respect of the transactions of that company, by the law of thc country in which the business is carried on accordingly. – A statute authorising an unincorporated company to sue and to be sued the name of its chairman, constitutes the chairman, when so suing or so sued, an agent for the members of the company in the aflairs of the company. – The members of a company formed for the purpose of carrying on business in a colony, are not discharged from liability on judgments obtained in the colony against the chairman, by reason of their having been resident in England, not being served with process, and having received no notice of the proceedings. – Where a statute subjects the property of members for the time being of an unincorporated company, to execution upon a judgment obtained against their chairman, reserving in other respects the liabilities of parties, the remedies given against the property are in cumulation, and a member may be proceeded against by action. – A judgment in a colonial court is no estoppel; nor is it pleadable in bar in an action brought in England for the same cause.

Citations:

[1850] EngR 74, (1850) 9 CB 662, (1850) 137 ER 1052

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

Cited – Vizcaya Partners Ltd v Picard and Another PC 3-Feb-2016
No Contractual Obligation to Try Case in New York
(Gibraltar) The appellant had invested in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff. They were repaid sums before the fund collapsed, and the trustees now sought repayment by way of enforcement of an order obtained in New York.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Jurisdiction

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.297421

The Bank of Australasia v Nias: 1851

By an Act of the Colonial Legislature of New South Wales, it was provided tbat a banking company should sue and be sued in the name of its chairman, arid that execution on any judgment against the oompany might be issued against the property of any member for the time being, in like manner as if such judgment had been obtairied against such member personally. In assumpsit against a member of the company on a judgment obtained in the colony against the chairman: Held, that the colonial Legislature had authority to pass the Act, and that there was nothing repugnant to the law of England, or to natural justice, in enacting that actions on contracts made by the company in the colony, instead of being brought against the shareholders individually, should be brought against the chairman whom they had appointed to represent them. That a judgment recovered in such an action, after service of process on the chairman, had the same effect beyond the territory of the colony which it would have had if the defendant had been personally served with process, and, he being a party to the record, the recovery had been personally against him. That, although in an action on a foreign or colonial judgment the judgment is examinable to a certain extent., as, for the purpose of shewing want of jurisdiction, or that defendant was not summoned, or that the judgment was fraudulently obtained, yet such judgment is not examinable upon the merits, as, for the purpose of shewing that the contract sued upon was not made, or was procured by fraud, or that the judgment was erroneous, But that a foreign or colonial judgment obtained against a co-contractor cannot be insisted on by way of merger in an action on the judgment.

Citations:

[1851] EngR 77, (1851) 16 QB 717, (1851) 117 ER 1055

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

Cited – Vizcaya Partners Ltd v Picard and Another PC 3-Feb-2016
No Contractual Obligation to Try Case in New York
(Gibraltar) The appellant had invested in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff. They were repaid sums before the fund collapsed, and the trustees now sought repayment by way of enforcement of an order obtained in New York.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Company

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.296393

Banque des Marchands de Moscou (Koupetschesky) v Kindersley: CA 1951

Sir Raymond Evershed MR discussed the need to keep the doctrine against approbation and reprobation within limits.

Judges:

Sir Raymond Evershed MR

Citations:

[1951] Ch D 112

Cited by:

Cited – Smith v Skanska Construction Services Ltd QBD 29-Jul-2008
The court considered whether the driver of a vehicle involved in a fatal road accident in Thailand was driving within the authority of the UK employers. The driver was not an employee but had authority to use company vehicles for tasks for the . .
Cited – McLaughlin and Others v Newall QBD 31-Jul-2009
The claimant asked the court to strike out the defence that the claimant had compromised his claim by agreement. The defendant had written letters critical of the claimants who were governors of a school which had disciplined his daughter a teacher . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.277726

Bumper Development Corporation Ltd v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: CA 1991

An Indian temple having a legal persona recognised in India may assert rights and make claims under English Law. Even though it would not be recognised as a litigant if based in England and Wales, it was nonetheless entitled, in accordance with the principle of comity of nations, to sue in England.
Purchas LJ said: ‘The particular difficulty arises out of English law’s restriction of legal personality to corporations or the like, that is to say the personified groups or series of individuals. This insistence on an essentially animate content in a legal person leads to a formidable conceptual difficulty in recognising as a party entitled to sue in our courts something which on one view is little more than a pile of stones.’
Issues of foreign law are issues of fact. However, they are a special kind of fact. The Court is entitled to apply its own legal knowledge to determining the issue. However, it is confined to materials on foreign law which are exhibited to an expert report. The court considered the approach to be taken where there was conflicting evidence as to foreign law. The court must resolve differences in the same way as in the case of other conflicting evidence as to facts. It is not permissible to reject uncontradicted expert evidence unless it is patently absurd.

Judges:

Purchas LJ

Citations:

[1991] 1 WLR 1362, [1991] 4 All ER 638

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Cited by:

Cited – Lloyd v Svenby QBD 27-Feb-2006
The two claimants sought title to a car registration plate and to a chassis number. They were to be applied to historic racing cars.
Held: The power to assign registration marks lay with the Secretary of State. Any legal rights rested not with . .
Cited – Regina v D(R) Misc 16-Sep-2013
Crown Court at Blackfriars – the court was asked to what extent a witness wanting, from religious conviction, to hide her face with the niqaab form of Islamic dress should be allowed to do so, whilst giving evidence.
Held: The court considered . .
Cited – XP v Compensa Towarzystwo Sa and Another QBD 13-Jul-2016
The claimant had been injured in two separate car accidents suffering physical and psychiatric injuries. Liability was admitted but the insurers coud not agree apportionment of losses. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.238747

The Eleftheria: 1970

In general, and all other things being equal, it is more satisfactory (from the point of view of ensuring that justice is done) for the law of a foreign country to be decided by the courts of that country.
Brandon J said: ‘I further regard, of substantial importance the circumstance that Greek law governs, and is, in respects which may well be material, different from English law. ‘
‘I recognise that an English court can, and often does, decide questions of foreign law on the basis of expert evidence from foreign lawyers. Nor do I regard such legal concepts as contractual good faith and morality as being so strange as to be beyond the capacity of an English court to grasp and apply. It seems to be clear, however, that in general, and other things being equal, it is more satisfactory for the law of a foreign country to be decided by the courts of that country. That would be my view, as a matter of common sense, apart from authority. But if authority be needed, it is to be found in The Cap Blanco [1913] P. 130 per Sir Samuel Evans P. at p. 136 and in Settlement Corporation v. Hochschild [1966] Ch. 10, per Ungoed-Thomas J., at p. 18…’
Brandon J identified the advantage on an appeal:
‘Apart from the general advantage which a foreign court has in determining and applying its own law, there is a significant difference in the position with regard to appeal. A question of foreign law decided by a court of the foreign country concerned is appealable as such to the appropriate appellate court of that country. But a question of foreign law decided by an English court on expert evidence is treated as a question of fact for the purposes of appeal, with the limitations in the scope of an appeal inherent in that categorisation. This consideration seems to me to afford an added reason for saying that, in general and other things being equal, it is more satisfactory for the law of a foreign country to be decided by the courts of that country. Moreover, by more satisfactory I mean more satisfactory from the point of view of ensuring that justice is done.’

Judges:

Brandon J

Citations:

[1970] P 94

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Approved – Donohue v Armco Inc and others HL 13-Dec-2001
The appellant had sought injunctions against the respondent US companies to restrain their commencing proceedings in the US against him. The parties had negotiated for the purchase of the run-off liabilities of a defunct insurance company. . .
Cited – OT Africa Line Ltd v Magic Sportswear Corporation and others CA 13-Jun-2005
The parties to a contract had agreed that the proper law for the contract was England. One party commenced proceedings in Canada, and the courts of Canada had accepted jurisdiction as the most appropriate and convenient forum to resolve the dispute. . .
Cited – The El Amria 1981
The court set out the principles to be applied where a party seeks to enforce or act in breach of a choice of jurisdiction contract. If a party seek to sue here in breach of such a clause, the court has a discretion to stay, but a stay should be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.228193

Bank Voor Handel En Scheepvaart NV v Slatford: 1951

A Dutch bank deposited a quantity of gold in London before the start of the 1939-1945 war. In May 1940 the Netherlands were invaded and they became an enemy territory for the purposes of the 1939 Act. The Royal Netherlands Government, with the approval of the UK Government, exercised their powers from London and in May 1940 they issued a decree which purported to have the effect of transferring property, including the gold, to the Netherlands Government (the A.1 decree). In July 1940, the Board of Trade made a vesting order transferring the gold to the Custodian of Enemy Property. He sold it for andpound;2 million. In May 1950 the Netherlands Government made an order returning the property in the gold to the Bank. The Bank then claimed against the Custodian in conversion for the present value of the gold. Devlin J held that the A.1 decree was ineffective to transfer moveable property in this country.
Held:
Devlin J said: ‘I think it is convenient to begin by considering what is the general principle of our law with regard to foreign legislation affecting property within our territory. There is little doubt that it is the lex situs which as a general rule governs the transfer of movables when effected contractually. The maxim mobilia sequuntur personam is the exception rather than the rule, and is probably to be confined to certain special classes of general assignments such as marriage settlements and devolutions on death and bankruptcy. Upon this basis the A.1 decree, not being a part of English law, would not transfer the property in this case. But decrees of this character have received in the authorities rather different treatment. Although there is not, as far as I am aware, any authority which distinguishes general legislation, such as part of a civil code, from ad hoc decrees, the effectiveness of such decrees does not appear on the authorities to be determined exclusively by the application of the lex situs. Apart from two recent cases on which the plaintiffs greatly rely, there has been no case in which such a decree has been enforced in this country, but the grounds for refusing effect to them have been variously put. Sometimes it is said that the decree is confiscatory. In the textbooks it is said sometimes that as a matter of public international law no State ought to seek to exercise sovereignty over property outside its own territory, and therefore the principle of comity is against enforcement; and sometimes it is said that the principle of effectiveness is against enforcement, since no State can expect to make its laws effective in the territory of another State. Dicey, Conflict of Laws, 6th ed., p. 13, states: ‘A State’s authority, in the eyes of other States and the courts that represent them, is, speaking very generally, coincident with, and limited by, its power. It is territorial. It may legislate for, and give judgments affecting, things and persons within its territory. It has no authority to legislate for, or adjudicate upon, things or persons not within its territory.’
Denning LJ said: ‘In this connection I would observe that the test of being a servant does not rest nowadays on submission to orders. It depends on whether the person is part and parcel of the organisation.’

Judges:

Devlin J, Denning LJ

Citations:

[1953] 1 QB 248, [1951] 2 TLR 755, [1951] 2 All ER 779

Statutes:

Trading With The Enemy Act 1939

Cited by:

Cited – Peer International Corporation Southern Music Publishing Company Inc Peermusic (UK) Limited v Termidor Music Publishers Limited Termidor Musikverlag Gmbh and Co Kg -And-Editoria Musical De Cuba CA 30-Jul-2003
Peer sought declarations that they were the owners, or licensees, of the UK copyright in musical works composed by Cuban nationals, relying on assignments in writing by the composers and in some instances by their heirs. The defendants claimed under . .
Cited – Ready Mixed Concrete Southeast Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance QBD 8-Dec-1967
Contracts of service or for services
In three cases appeals were heard against a finding as to whether a worker was entitled to have his employer pay National Insurance contributions on his behalf which would apply if he were an employee. He worked as an ‘owner-driver’
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Employment

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.186123

Beck v Value Capital Ltd (No 2): 1974

The plaintiffs had obtained leave to serve proceedings out of the jurisdiction. They then sought to add a claim and argued that once an additional cause of action was shown to be generically within the scope of Order 11, that was an end of the matter. The court must exercise discretion as if the case were a domestic one, and may not enquire whether leave would have been granted in the circumstances of the particular case.
Held: The court disagreed. Goulding said: ‘No authority directly on the point has been cited. In principle I find the plaintiff’s proposition unacceptable. It seems to me manifestly unfair to a foreign defendant, and it would often enable a plaintiff to circumvent the court’s discretion under RSC Ord. 11 by the familiar device of throwing a sprat to catch a mackerel . . It is enough to say that the discretion to allow an amendment . . will not be exercised an injustice to the opposite party will result, and that it is in general unjust to amend a writ served under RSC Ord. 11 by adding something which the court would probably have refused to sanction under RSC Ord. 11.’
If proceedings are served out of the jurisdiction, and the plaintiff later seeks to bring in by amendment another cause of action which could also be the subject of leave to serve out, then it seems that the amendment is permissible, so long as no injustice to the opposite party will result.

Judges:

Goulding J

Citations:

[1975] 1 WLR 6, [1974] 3 All ER 442

Cited by:

Appeal from – Beck v Value Capital Ltd (No 2) CA 1976
. .
Cited – NML Capital Ltd v Argentina SC 6-Jul-2011
The respondent had issued bonds but in 2001 had declared a moratorium on paying them. The appellant hedge fund later bought the bonds, heavily discounted. Judgment was obtained in New York, which the appellants now sought to enforce against assets . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.441567

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

Krenge v Krenge: 1999

The power in an English court to stay family proceedings here in favour of a foreign jurisdiction exists independently of any statute.

Citations:

[1999] 1 FLR 969

Cited by:

Cited – Moore v Moore CA 20-Apr-2007
The family were wealthy, and had lived for some time in Spain. On the breakdown of the marriage, the wife returned to the UK, and sought ancillary relief here, though the divorce had been in Spain. The husband argued that this should be dealt with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Jurisdiction

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.251425