Home   About us   About ADR   NADR Services   Publications
  Forms   Members   Forums   Links   NMA
• Adjudication Case Summaries
• Adjudication New South Wales
• Adjudication NewZealand
• Adjudication Queensland
• Adjudication Reports AU/NZ
• Adjudication Singapore
• Adjudication Victoria
• Adjudication Western Australia
• Adjudicator Nomination Bodies
• ADR Organisations
• Arbitration
• Arbitration Cases Ireland
• Arbitration Cases Scotland
• Banking and Finance
• Building Claims Consultants
• Conflicts Lectures
• Constitutional Law
• Construction Bodies
• Construction Law
• Court Mediation Schemes
• Directories - Yellow Pages
• Dispte Review Boards
• Educational establishments
• Employment Dispute Resolution
• Environment
• Ethics
• European Law and Institutions
• Expert witnesses
• Export Import Directory
• Family Mediation
• Government Bodies
• Health Care Dispute Resolution
• Intellectual Property
• International Arbitration
• International Trade Law
• Law Societies and Associations
• Legal Publishers
• Legal Research
• Legal Skills
• Maritime Law
• Mediation
• Mediation Organisations
• Middle East ADR
• ODR - On Line Dispute Resolution
• On-line ADR Journals and Newsletters
• Practitioners
• Sources of Law
• Sport
• Telecommunications
• Trade Organisations
• Travel



View a printer friendly version of this page.

Aeolian Shipping SA v ISS Machinery Services Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 1162 Conflicts ; English procedural law : Japanese Substantive Law. Vessel supplied with a Japanese turbo charge : This broke down : Second contract to supply a replacement – via Hong Kong distributor. Refusal to pay and claim for set off against broken down original. Held; English Law and jurisdiction – including English Conflicts of Law which resulted in Japanese substantive law applying – whereby there is no warranty of satisfactory quality beyond 6 month guarantee – and claim time barred under that law. Summary judgement ordered and confirmed on appeal.Potter LJ; Mance LJ; Sir martin Nourse. 20th July 2001.

Aic Ltd. v Nigeria [2003] EWHC 1357 (QB) State Immunity : Registration of judgment. Mr Justice Stanley Burnton. 13 June 2003

Airbus Industrie GIE v. Patel and Others [1998] UKHL 12 Anti-suit injunctions. Lords Goff ; Slynn ; Steyn ; Clyde ; Hutton. 2nd April 1998.

Alberta Inc 889457 v Katanga Mining Ltd [2008] EWHC 2679 (Comm) Forum conveniens : Place of business : whether Democratic Republic of Congo a venue where the claimaint might be accorded justice or is rife with corruption and systemic instability. Mr Justice Tomlinson. 5th November 2008

American Motorists Insurance Co. (Amico) v Cellstar Corporation [2002] EWHC 421 (Commercial) Applicable law : Cargo Insurance. Mr Justice David Steel. 15th March 2002.

Andromeda Marine SA v OW Bunker & Trading A/S [2006] EWHC 777 (Comm) Negative Injunction : Claimant's - third parties ship owners to a charterer's contract for bunkers from the defendant sought a declaration / injunction that no action lay against them as third parties. Main action was before the Danish Court. Held : Court had no jurisdiction. If at all, this action should be pursued before the Danish Court. His Honour Judge Morison. Commercial Court. 11th April 2006.

Antec International Ltd v Biosafety USA Inc [2006] EWHC 47 (Comm) Forum Non-Conveniens : Jursidisction. QBD. MRS JUSTICE GLOSTER, DBE 27th January 2006.

Bank Of Scotland Of Mound v Butcher [1998] EWCA Civ 1306 This appeal raises a short point in the application of the Rome Convention. Is the proper law of a contract of guarantee between the Bank of Scotland and Mr David Butcher and Mr Sievewright Scottish or English and Welsh law? . Held on appel : Obligations not severale. Scottish law applies. Peter Gibson LJ; Aldous LJ; Potter LJ. 28th July 1998.

Barlow Clowes International Ltd. v Henwood [2008] EWCA Civ 577 Jurisdiction : Domicile : For the purposes of a winding up petition was the respondent domiciled in England & Wales or overseas at the relevant time. Test for domicile restated. Held : Yes he was domiciled in E & W. Waller LJ, Arden LJ, Moore-Bick LJ. 23rd May 2008.

Barton (Deceased), Re [2002] EWHC 264 (Ch) The case raises questions on the scope and effect of the Hague Convention of 1985 on the Law Applicable to Trusts and their Recognition, to which effect was given by the Recognition of Trusts Act 1987, and appears to be the first case in this country on the Hague Convention and the 1987 Act. Mr Justice Lawrenece Collins. 20th March 2002.

Base Metal Trading Ltd v Shamurin [2001] EWHC 512 (Comm) Conflicts ; English or Russian law - tort claim. Application for summary enforcement failed since at this stage applicant had failed to establish that English Law applied. Mr Justice Moore-Bick. 21st November 2001.

Base Metal Trading Ltd. v Shamurin [2003] EWHC 2419 (Comm) Conflicts : Choice of Law : Extensive review of cases & Rome Convention. Falling out between Russian Trading Partners. Mr Justice Tomlinson. 22nd October 2003.

Base Metal Trading Ltd. v Shamurin [2004] EWCA Civ 1316 This appeal raises a number of important choice of law issues. They arise from a judgment of Tomlinson J. who dismissed a claim by Base Metal Trading Ltd. (BMTL) against Mr Shamurin. BMTL, a Guernsey company, claimed damages against Mr Shamurin, a Russian national and its former director and employee, for breach of a common law, equitable and/or implied contractual duty of care by entering into speculative trades on the London Metal Exchange on its behalf. It was common ground that such claims were not actionable under Russian law and in any event would have been time-barred in Russia. The judge held that Russian law was the proper law of each claim. He also indicated that even if Guernsey law or English law (which were taken to be the same) applied no breach of duty had been established against Mr Shamurin. BMTL now accept the judge\'s finding that Russian law was the proper law of Mr Shamurin\'s contract of employment, but challenges his other findings. The judge was right to conclude that Russian law was the proper law of the claim in tort. Guernsey law, the law of the place of BMTL\'s incorporation, was the proper law of the claim in equity. The judge was right to conclude that BMTL had failed to establish any breach of duty by Mr Shamurin. Accordingly I would dismiss this appeal.Tuckey LJ; Arden LJ; Mr Justice Newman. 14th October 2004.

Beximco Pharmaceuticals Ltd v Shamil Bank of Bahrain EC [2004] EWCA Civ 19 Choice of Law : England : Reference to the Sharia'a alluded to an intention by the parties to comply with Islamic Principles but they did not agree to be governed by Sharia Law. A contract must chose one Law alone to govern a contract. CA. Potter LJ; Laws LJ; Lady Justice Arden. 28th January 2004

Bols Distilleries (t/a as Bols Royal Distilleries) & Anor v Superior Yacht Services Ltd (Gilbraltar ) [2006] UKPC 45 The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Gibraltar to hear a case concerning an alleged contract relating to the construction and operation of a racing yacht. Article 2(1) & 23(1) Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001. Lords Hoffmann: Hope : Scott; Rodger; Walker.Privy Council 11th October 2006.

Booth v Phillips [2004] EWHC 1437 (Admlty) Actions in negligence - tort : and breach of employer\'s duty to provide safe place of work under contract. Crew member died in an accident at sea. Widow as claimant. Vessel Liberian : Jordanian managment company. 1st defendant in UK; 2nd - 4th defendants overseas. In absence of choice of law, whilst no other English connection - no connection to Jordan either. English law and jurisdiction applied. Standards of care international - applied to all states. Nigell Teare QC. 17th June 2004.

BP International Ltd. v Energy Infrastructure Group Ltd. [2003] EWHC 2924 (Comm) Stay pending outcome of litigation in Dallas. Mr Jutice Morison. 5th December 2003

Brietenbucher v Wittke [2008] ScotCS CSOH_145 Jurisdiction : Defender who is sued by an administrator, signed a construction contract subject to German law and jurisdiction in Germany but is domiciled in Scotland. The court found that she contracted as an individual not as a trader and accordinly under Article 2.1 Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 she should be sued in her country of domecile. Hence the Court of Session has jurisdiction. Lord Brodie. 16th October 2008.

British Sugar v Fratelli [2004] EWHC 2560 Jurisdiction and choice of forum - Brussels Convention considered. HHJ Richard Seymour. 12th November 2004

Canada Trust Company v Stolzenberg [1997] EWCA Civ 2592 Application of Lugano Convention : Claimant in UK - 1st defendant in Switzerland. Nourse LJ; Pill LJ; Waller LJ. 29th October 1997.

Canada Trust Company v. Stolzenberg and Gamba [2000] UKHL 51 Application of Lugano Convention : Claimant in UK - 1st defendant in Switzerland. Lords Steyn : Hoffmann :Cooke : Hope : Hobhouse. 12th October 2000.

Carnegie v Giessen [2005] EWCA Civ 191 Enforcement of a foreign debt - conversion into sterling. CA. Ward LJ; Dyson LJ; Carnwath LJ. 1st March 2005.

Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation v SNC Passion [2004] EWHC 569 (Comm) Conflicts : French or English Law : Choice of Law English : Defendant a French company in a French territory. Held : Whichever court outcome would be the same. Mr Justice Cooke. 19th March 2004

Centrax Ltd v Citibank NA [1999] EWCA Civ 892 Conflicts : Applicable law : Meaning of Clause - This Agreement and all documents, agreements and instruments related to this Agreement shall be governed by...the laws of the State of New York..... any action or dispute between the parties regarding any Payment Instrument shall be governed by ...the (Drawee’s) laws...: ” Whether agreement sevearable with different laws applying. Art 3 Rome I considered. Held : New York Law applied. Roch LJ; ward LJ; Waller LJ. 4th March 1999.

Cherney v Deripaska [2008] EWHC 1530 (Comm) Forum conveniens : purported oral contract subject to english Law & Jurisidction : Court determined that the risks inherent in a trial in Russia (assassination, arrest on trumped up charges and lack of a fair trial) are sufficient to make England the forum in which the case can most suitably be tried in the interests of both parties and the ends of justice and, accordingly, the proper place for the determination of this claim. Mr Justice Christopher Clarke. 3rd July 2008

CLOUT Case Law on UNCITRAL Texts

Daad Sharab v Usama Salfiti [1996] EWCA Civ 1189 Enforcement : Public Policy : Foreign Illegality : Relevance of allegations of illegality under foreign law before an English Court: Libyan Law describes unlawful intermediary activities as "Mediation". CA. Nourse LJ; Judge LJ; Waller LJ. 12th December 1996.

Dornoch Ltd v Mauritius Union Assurance Co Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 389 Conflicts : Forum. CA. Sir Mark Potter; May LJ; Tuckey LJ. 10th April 2006

Dornoch Ltd. v Mauritius Union Assurance Co Ltd. [2005] EWHC 1887 (Comm) Applications for (i) a declaration that the Excess Reinsurance had been validly avoided on account of non-disclosure or material misrepresentation by MUA; (ii) a declaration that the claimants (\"the Reinsurers\") were not liable to MUA because the claims, even if proved, fell outside the scope of the Excess Reinsurance; (iii) damages for misrepresentation pursuant to the Misrepresentation Act 1967, as against MUA; (iv) damages for deceit, alternatively damages for negligent misstatement, as against MCB. Cross application for stay : Reinsurance - evidence of fraud in handling of original policies - subject to Mauritius Law and concurrent actions. Mr Justice Aikens. 19th August 2005.

Duarte v The Black and Decker Corp [2007] EWHC 2720 (QB) Restrictive Covenants and ex-employees : Applicable Law - England or US? Application of Articles 6 & 16 Rome 1. Mr Justice Filed. 23rd November 2007.

East West Corporation v DKBS 1912 [2002] EWHC 83 (Comm) Goods shipped by the claimants in Hong Kong in containers were carried to Chile on the defendants’ liner services; they were cleared through customs and delivered to a person not entitled to the goods without presentation of the bills of lading. To such a claim, a shipowner would normally have no defence, but the circumstances in this case are said by the defendants to provide them with a defence on several cumulative and alternative grounds. The issues give rise to points on the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992, the delivery obligations under bills of lading and the law of Chile, including an issue on the scope of Article 4 of the Hamburg Rules which are in force in Chile. Mr Justice Thomas. 7th February 2002.

Ennstone Building Products Limited v. Stanger Limited [2002] EWCA Civ 916 Conflicts ; Action in contract and in tort for negligent advice. Where the tort consists in essence of the giving of negligent advice, that tort is committed where the advice is received: see Diamond –v- Bank of London and Montreal, page 346G. On that basis I would regard the alleged tort in this case as having been committed in England, in which case English law would apply. Potter LJ; Keene LJ. 28th June 2002.

Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation [1955] EWCA Civ 3 Contract concluded by telex : where and when is a contract concluded when electronic communications are used ? Held : Where received - in this case London, so English Law applied - consent to issue writ out of jurisdiction. Denning LJ; Birket LJ; Parker LJ. 17th May 1955

ETI Euro Telecom International NV v Republic of Bolivia & Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 880 Freezing order - risk of dissipation of funds : State Immunity : New York arbitration pending under ICSID : unsuccessful appeal. Tuckey LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ; Stanley Burnton LJ. 28th July 2008

ETI Euro Telecom International NV v Republic of Bolivia [2008] EWHC 1689 (Comm) Freezing order - risk of dissipation of funds : State Immunity : New York arbitration pending under ICSID : Costs on indemnity basis. Mr Justice Andrew Smith. 11th July 2008

Evialis S.A. v S.I.A.T. [2003] EWHC 863 (Comm) Conflicts : Application for injunction restraining Italian court proceedings in favour of english Jurisdiction clause and declaration. Refused : Assertions of oppresive behaviour dismissed. Mr Justice Andrew Smith: Commercial Court. 16th April 2003.

GAN Insurance Company Ltd v Tai Ping Insurance Company Ltd [1999] EWCA Civ 1524 Conflicts : Applicable law in reinsurance contract : Does a follow on clause incorporate jurisdiction provisions of original contract - in this case Taiwanese Law ? Held : NO - there is an implied term in a reinsurance contract that the law of the reinsurers state applied. In this case English Law. Rome I considered. Beldam LJ; Brooke LJ; Mummery LJ. 28th May 1999.

Glencore International AG v Exter Shipping Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 528 Appeal against anti-suit injunction regarding US litigation. VC. Robert Walker LJ; Rix LJ. 18th April 2002.

Gomez v Vives [2008] EWCA Civ 1065 The ascertainment of the domicile of a trust for the purposes of Article 5(6), and also questions on the interpretation and the application of the expression \"sued …as … trustee or beneficiary\" in that Article. Jacob LJ; Lawrence Collings LJ; Mr Justice Lewison. 3rd October 2008

Habib Bank Ltd v Central Bank of Sudan [2006] EWHC 1767 (Comm) The contracts sued on (the undertakings to honour HBL\'s claim for principal and interest provided all terms and conditions were complied with) predate the coming into force of the Contracts (Applicable Law) Act 1990 (\"the 1990 Act\"). The proper law of the contracts must therefore be established by reference to common law principles. There was no express choice of law. The governing law is therefore that of the country with which the contract has its closest and most real connection. In fact the position is essentially the same under the 1990 Act. Whether the contract was a unilateral or a bi-lateral contract, the contemplated performance by HBL was notification and confirmation of the letters of credit, inspection of the documents presented and negotiation of the documents. All of these steps involved action to be taken in England and I am in no doubt that England is the country with the closest and most real connection to the contracts. Mr Justice Field. 19th July 2006.

Harding v. Wealands [2006] UKHL 32 Tort : Personal injury : Accident in NSW : Insurance : Substantive & procedural Law : Conflict : UK law the proper law to assess damages. House of Lords. Lords Bingham; Woolf; Hoffmann; Rodger; Carswell. 5th July 2006.

Hewden Tower Cranes Ltd v Wolffkran GmbH [2007] EWHC 857 (TCC) Hire crane collapsed. Hewden having paid out compensation to various parties sought to recover against the German manufacturer / hirer of the equipment on the grounds of negligence ? defective welds in crane ? Civil Liability Contribution Act 1978. Question ? whether under EC Reg 44/2002 Arts 2(1); 5(3) & 23 the UK or German court had jurisdiction . Held : UK Court had jurisdiction. Mr Justice Jackson. 4th April 2007.

IFR Ltd v Federal Trade Spa [2001] EWHC 519 (Comm) Conflicts : Whther contract voidable for duress -impact upon choice of law clause : availability of injunctive relief. Mr Justice Colman. 19th September 2001

Import Export Metro Ltd. v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores S.A. [2003] EWHC 11 (Comm) Applicants apply (1) for a declaration that the English Court should not exercise any jurisdiction which it may have over the dispute ; (2) for an order that the issue and service of the Claim Form out of the jurisdiction be set aside; (3) for an order staying the proceedings before the English Court on the grounds that Chile is the most appropriate forum for the resolution of the dispute. Bill of lading subject to english Law & Jurisdiction. Mr Justice Gross. 23rd January 2003.

Internaut Shipping GmbH & Anor v Fercometal Sarl [2003] EWCA Civ 812 (17 June 2003) Personality : Sub-charterparty dispute commenced in the name of the owners, not the main charterers. Court ordered that the title of the arbitration be amended to reflect the correct names of the contractual personalities in dispute. CA. Mummery LJ; Sedley LJ; Rix LJ. 17th June 2003.

Kenburn Waste Management Ltd v Bergmann [2002] EWCA Civ 98 The appeal raises questions on Article 5 of the Brussels Convention as incorporated into domestic law by the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 and (as part of the inquiry called for under Article 5 of the Brussels Convention) on Article 4 of the Rome Convention as incorporated by the Contracts (Applicable Law) Act 1990. Aldous LJ; Robert Walker LJ; Keene LJ. 30th January 2002.

Kolden Holdings Ltd v Rodette Commerce Ltd [2007] EWHC 1597 (Comm) Application for stay to Cyprus refused. English court first ceised of action. same parties involved even though a change of name. Arts 28 / 28 Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001. Mr Justice Aikens. 4th July 2007

Kuwait Oil Tanker Company SAK v Al Bader [2000] EWCA Civ 160 Conflicts : Tort : Conspiracy : Double actionability : Whether conspiracy action recognised in Kuwait. Nourse LJ; Potter LJ; Clarke LJ. 18th May 2000.

Latvian Shipping Comp v Insurance Co\"Ingosstrakh\" Ltd [1998] EWHC 1201 (Comm) Conflicts : Applicable Law. Pre-Rome I. Common Law Rules. Mr Justice Langley. 27th November 1998.

Lightning v Lightning Electrical Contractors Ltd [1998] EWHC Admin 431 Applicable Law. England or Scotland. Art 4 Rome Convention. Peter Gibson LJ; Henry LJ; Millett LJ. 23rd April 1998.

Macmillan Inc v Bishopgate Investment Trust Plc [1995] EWCA Civ 55 Conflicts : Applicable Law - Restitution - UK or New York. Staughton LJ; Auld LJ; Aldous LJ. 2nd November 1995.

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd [2007] EWHC 1510 (Comm) Anti-suit application : successful. HHJ Mackie QC. 25th May 2007

MBM Fabri-Clad Ltd v Eisen Und Huttenwerke Thal AG [1999] CA. Lawtel AC9500474 The English Court has jurisdiction for an action for delivery of defective goods in the UK even though the defect occurred during manufacture abroad. Art 5 Brussels Convention. CA. Pill LJ, Aldous LJ, Ward LJ. 3rd November 1999.

Middle Eastern Oil LLC v National Bank of Abu Dhabi [2008] EWHC 2895 (Comm) Choice of Law and Forum : Tort action : loss sustained by sums in bank account being frozen pending investigations of allegations of money laundering : Impact upon share value of english Company forced into a crditor\'s voluntary liquidation - resulting in the applicant losing $6M. Banking contract subject to UAE law. Held : UAE the proper forum - seized of whether UAE or English Law to apply. Mr Justice Teare. 27th November 2008.

Miles Platt Ltd. v Townroe Ltd. [2003] EWCA Civ 145 Application of Brussels Covnetion : Tuckey LJ, Laws LJ. Mrs Justice Black. 13th February 2003

Munchener Ruckversicherungs Gesellschaft v Commonwealth Insurance Co [2004] EWHC 914 (Comm) Forum Conveniens. Court found England the appropriate forum on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case, as applied to legal principles on forum. Court made it clear the decision is based on facts not law to prevent any further legal challenge on a point of law. Mr Justice Morison. 28th April 2004.

O.T. Africa Line Ltd v Hijazy (The Kribi) - [2001] 1 Lloyd\'s Rep 76 Anti-suit : Action in Belgium. Exclusive English jurisdiction clause. Injunction issued. Aikens J. Commercial Court. 27th October 2000

O.T. Africa Line Ltd v Magic Sportswear Corporation [2005] EWCA Civ 710 The critical question in the present appeal is whether an English court, on which the parties to a contract of carriage have conferred exclusive jurisdiction to resolve their disputes, should in its discretion decline to stay proceedings in this country and grant injunctive relief to restrain one of the parties from bringing and continuing proceedings in the courts of a country whose law permits proceedings to be brought in those courts. The traditional answer to this question has in the past been that it depends on the proper law of the contract of carriage. If the proper law provides that the exclusive jurisdiction clause is unenforceable, the English court will have no regard to it; if the proper law says that it is enforceable, or enforceable in the absence of strong reason for it not to be enforced and no such strong reason exists, the question will then arise whether, as a matter of discretion, it is appropriate to support that enforceability by injunctive relief. Laws LJ; Rix LJ; Longmore LJ. 13th JUne 2005.

O.T. Africa Line Ltd. v Magic Sportswear Corporation [2004] EWHC 2441 (Comm) Application for anti-suit injunction. Mr Justice Langley. 3rd November 2004

Oakley v Ultra Vehicle Design Ltd. [2005] EWHC 872 (Ch) Two companies in administration - one in UK one in Germany. Disputed ownership of a valuable vehicle. Held : English jurisdiction : but in the face of uncontested oral evidence of a German choice of law, German Law applied. Rome I applied. Mr Justice Lloyd. 25th May 2005.

Ophthalmic Innovations International (UK) Ltd v Ophthalmic Innovations International Inc. [2004] EWHC 2948 (Ch) Packaging caused contact lenses to cloud up after implant. Action commenced in the US but not disclosed when application to serve out of jurisdiction made and granted. Here set aside granted. Applicable law US. Mr Justice Lawrence Collins. 16th December 2004.

Print Concept GmbH v GEW (EC) Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 352 Applicable law : If parties to what is often called a distributorship agreement do business in different countries but do not expressly agree what law is to govern their contractual relationship, it is often difficult to decide what that law should be. That is the problem which arises in this case where the parties agree that they entered into a binding contract in November 1995 for the exclusive distribution in Germany, Switzerland and Austria by the German claimants (\"Print Concept\") of air-cooled drying systems to be made and supplied by the defendants, G.E.W. (EC) Ltd (\"GEW\"), who carry on business in England. The answer to the problem is said to be of importance because the contract has now terminated and, if German law governs the contract, GEW will have to pay an indemnity assessed as a proportion of the average contractual turnover while the contract lasted, whereas no such indemnity is said to be payable if the contract is governed by English law. Held : The supply rather than the development of the German market the principle obligation. English supply - English law applied. Tuckey LJ; Longmore LJ; Sir Christopher Slade. 2nd March 2001.

PT Pan Indonesia Bank Ltd TBK v Marconi Communications International Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 422 The claim of Marconi is for damages for breach of contract in respect of the failure of Panin Bank to honour its obligations as confirmer of a letter of credit, pursuant to which Marconi drew various drafts and presented them to Panin Bank under the terms of the credit and which Panin Bank failed to accept. The appeal principally concerns the proper application of Article 4 of the Rome Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations (\"The Rome Convention), incorporated into English law by the Contracts (Applicable Law) Act 1990.Potter LJ; Buxton LJ; Hooper LJ. 27th April 2005.

Racy v Hawila [2004] EWCA Civ 209 Conflicts or priorities : Racy had undertaken to pursue English litigation before proceeding with Lebanese litigation. Whilst interlinked the disputes and remedies were difference. Anti-suit injunction refused - but Racy required to honour his undertaking and proceed with the English trial which was imminent. Thorpe LJ; May LJ; Jonathan Parker LJ. 18th February 2004.

Raiffeisen Zentralbank Osterreich Ag v An Feng Steel Co. Ltd. [2001] EWCA Civ 68 Conflicts - applicable law : Contractual assignment - English or French Law - significance - different outcomes and impact upon existence of insurable interest - thus impacting upon insurance claim. Held : Contract - governed by Rome I : English Law applied. Aldous LJ; Mance LJ; Mr Justice Charles. 26th January 2001.

Roerig v Valiant Trawlers Ltd. [2002] EWCA Civ 21 Conflicts : Applicable law for assessment of damages. The Dutch claimant\'s husband died in a trawler accident on board an English owned vessel. Held : English Law applied. Vice President of CA Simon Brown LJ; Waller LJ; Sedley LJ. 28th January 2002.

Royal Bank of Canada v Cooperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen-Boerenleenbank BA [2004] EWCA Civ 7 Anti-suit injunction sought against trial in New York. The New York trial was in its final stages. Held : Even if there was an English Jurisdiction clause it was now too late for an injunction. Thorpe LJ; Mance LJ; Mr Justice Evans-Lombe. 23rd January 2004.

Royal Bank of Canada v Cooperative Centrale Raiffeisen-Boorenleenbank Binding Authority [2003] EWHC 2913 (Comm) Application for anti-suit injunctions. Concurrent proceedings in London and New York. Conflicts. Mr Justice Andrew Smith. 2nd December 2003.

Samcrete Egypt Engineers and Contractors S.a.e. v Land Rover Exports Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 2019 Arts 3 & 4 Rome Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations (“the Rome Convention”). Contract of Guarantee Application for stay of proceedings. Thorpe LJ; Potter LJ. 21st December 2001.

Scottish & Newcastle International Limited v Othon Ghalanos Ltd [2008] UKHL 11 Jurisdiction : export contract to EC member state. Where is delivery made in an fob export contract ? At ships rail in export country – impact upon jurisdiction ; application of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001. Lords Bingham; Rodger; Brown ; Mance; Neuberger : 20th February 2008

Sharab v HRH Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal Bin Abdal-Aziz Al-Saud [2008] EWHC 1893 (Ch) Jurisdiction : Whether court should decline jurisdiction or rule that Libya the most appropriate forum. Held : In the interests of justice issue of writ out of jurisdiction granted - case should be heard before the High Court. John L. Powell Q.C. 31st July 2008

Staines v Walsh [2003] EWHC 458 (Ch) Applicable law in absence of choice by the parties. Rome I applied - English Law governed the dispute. Mr Justice Goldring. 14th March 2003.

Standard Bank Plc v Agrinvest International Inc [2007] EWHC 2595 (Comm) Applications for anti-suit injunctions and declarations on law and jurisdiction. Mr Justice Teare. 9th November 2007.

Svenska Petroleum Exploration AB v Lithuania & Anor [2005] EWHC 2437 (Comm) Conflicts : State Immunity : Lithuania took part in an arbitration in respect of an exploration venture defending a claim for damages in relation to the issuing of licences. The arbitral tribunal held that the State was a party to the arbitration agreement. Enforcement action in England unsuccessfully resisted on grounds of state immunity. Mrs Justice Gloster. 4th November 2005.

T&N Ltd v In the matter of the Insolvency Act 1986 [2005] EWHC 2990 (Ch) The issues in summary are as follows. First, assuming that the relevant act or omission giving rise to a particular US Asbestos Claim occurred before 1 May 1996 but the resulting damage did not occur until after that date, will the choice of law applicable in England to the claims be governed by the common law or by the Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (the 1995 Act)? This turns on the construction of section 14 of the Act. Secondly, assuming that the choice of law applicable to a claim would be governed by the common law, would the court apply English law to the claim, unless and to the extent that US law was applied by way of the exception confirmed by the Privy Council in Red Sea Insurance Ltd v Bouygues SA [1995] 1 AC 190. Thirdly, if by way of the exception US law was exclusively applied to the claim, would the quantification of damages be treated as a matter of procedure and therefore governed by English law as the lex fori? Fourthly, the same question is raised on the assumption that the choice of law applicable to the US Asbestos Claims was governed by the 1995 Act.Mr Justice David Richards. 21st December 2005

Tavoulareas v Tsavliris [2005] EWHC 2140 (Comm) Mr. George Tsavliris, the 1st defendant, has applied to set aside a judgment entered against him in default of acknowledgment of service on 17 January 2002. The defendant in the 2nd action is Alexander G Tsavliris and Sons Maritime Company, a Greek company. AGT Co have brought an application challenging the jurisdiction of this court over the proceedings. Mr Justice Andrew Smith. 12th October 2005.

Trafigura Beheer BV v Kookmin Bank Co [2006] EWHC 1450 (Comm) Trafigura has countered Korean proceedings by starting the present action, in which it claims against Kookmin a declaration of non – liability. Trafigura also claims an anti – suit injunction to prevent Kookmin carrying on the Korean proceedings. Kookmin challenged the jurisdiction of the court and Trafigura unsuccesffully attempted to obtain an interim anti – suit injunction.Here the question was what law governs tort actions. Held : English Law. Mr Justice Aikens. 16th June 2006.

Travelers Casualty & Surety Co Canada v Sun Life Assurance Co Canada (UK) Ltd [2006] EWHC 2716 (Comm) Insurance : Held : Closest connection Canada. Mr Justice Christopher Clarke. 1st November 2006

Turner (Judgments Convention/Enforcement of judgments) [2004] EUECJ C-159/02 Brussels Convention - Proceedings brought in a Contracting State - Proceedings brought in another Contracting State by the defendant in the existing proceedings - Defendant acting in bad faith in order to frustrate the existing proceedings - Compatibility with the Brussels Convention of the grant of an injunction preventing the defendant from continuing the action in another Member State. Response to the House of Lords reference in Turner v Grovit - to the effect that anti-suit injunctions are not available against European Member State courts. V. Skouris, President, P. Jann (Rapporteur), C.W.A. Timmermans, C. Gulmann, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and A. Rosas, Presidents of Chambers, A. La Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen, N. Colneric and S. von Bahr, Judges. 27th April 2004.

UBS Ag v HSH Nordbank Ag [2008] EWHC 1529 (Comm) Jurisdiction : interpretation of clause - viz whether New York Court or English Court had jurisdiction. Held : New York. Mr Justice Walker. Commercial Court. 4th July 2008.

Youell v Kara Mara Shipping Company Ltd [2000] EWHC 220 (Comm) Conflicts : Exclusive Jurisdiction clause in favour of English Law and Courts. Insurers sought anti-suit in favour of English litigation of insurance claim opposing Louisianna jurisdiction. Application granted. Mr Justice Aikens. 13th March 2000.

Top of page

    Copyright © NADR 2000, all rights reserved.