The bank having sued the defendant under a guarantee, the defendant sought to join in the principal debtor company to pursue a counterclaim. The defendant appealed a refusal on the ground that the principal would not itself have been given leave to serve a writ on the plaintiff who was outside the jurisdiction.
Held: The appeal was allowed. No distinction was to be made between sub-paragraphs (i) and (ii): ‘Once the bank brought their proceedings in this country for the sumwhich they say is owning to them, they submitted to the jurisdiction of these courts; and thereby exposed themselves to any defence or counterclaim which is properly connected with these proceedings.’
Judges:
Lord Denning MR, Shaw LJ, Griffiths LJ
Citations:
Unrepoerted, 15 July 1981
Statutes:
Rules of the Supreme Court 6(2)(b)(ii)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Balkanbank v Naser Taher and Others QBD 13-Feb-1995
The plaintiff had obtained a worldwide Mareva injunction, giving an undertaking for damages. On its discharge, the defendants sought to make a counterclaim. The defendant company and its subsidiaries sought to counterclaim for their damages suffered . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.200490