Be careful what you ask for! Barclays v ENPAM: the High Court again employs...
Barclays v ENPAM has been travelling in my briefcase for some time – apologies. Reminiscent of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Alexandros, and the High Court in Nomura , Blair J in October 2015...
View ArticleJust did not do it. USCA confirms strict attributability test in Ranza v Nike.
In Ranza v Nike, the Court of Appeal for the ninth circuit confirmed the high hurdle to establish personal jurisdiction over foreign corporations in the US, following the Supreme Court’s decisions in...
View ArticleThe November 2015 draft Hague ‘Judgments’ project. A powerful potion or a...
The November 2015 draft ‘Judgments project’ of the Hague Conference on private international law, otherwise known as the draft convention on the recognition and enforcement of judgments relating to...
View ArticleAway to Scotland with thee! CA applies forum non conveniens to intra-UK...
A great example of internal forum shopping and the application of forum non conveniens in the Court of Appeal. (Just before Christmas. I am still hacking away at my end-of-year queue). Claimants claim...
View ArticleThe lady is not for turning. CJEU sticks to classic application of exclusive...
In Case C-605/14, Komu v Komu, the CJEU stuck to its classic application of the rule of Article 22(1) Brussels I (now Article 24(1) Brussels Recast). This Article prescribes exclusive jurisdiction for...
View ArticleReading the blog with the 2nd ed of the Private International Law Handbook.
Readers will have noticed that a substantial part of the blog relates to Conflict of Laws /private international law. Following the example of Steve Peers, I will from now on add tags to the conflicts...
View ArticleAnd the winner is….National law. Saugmandsgaard ØE AG in Austro-Mechana on...
Determining whether a legal relationship is one in tort, for the purposes of (now) Article 7(2) of the Brussels I Recast Regulation, is in principle subject to autonomous interpretation. National law...
View ArticleAnti-suit once again climaxes outside the Brussels I (Recast) context. The...
As I have reported before, English practice is to continue using anti-suit injunctions outside of the Brussels I Regulation, in particular to support arbitration. Recent application was made in...
View ArticleKokott AG on the notion of ‘judgment’ and the compatibility of Mareva orders...
In Kokott AG’s words, ‘following the West Tankers case…in the present case the Court is once again confronted with a specific procedural feature of the Anglo-American legal system.’ Article 34 of the...
View Article(Polish) Ius novit (English) curia. The High Court settles Polish law in...
As readers will be aware, the Rome II Regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations, harmonises Member States’ governing law rules on non-contractual obligations (not entirely...
View ArticleDutch Shell Nigeria / Royal Dutch Shell ruling: anchor jurisdiction confirmed...
As I have reported in December, the Gerechtshof Den Haag confirmed jurisdiction against Shell’s Nigerian daughter company. The proceedings can be joined with the suit against the mother company Royal...
View ArticleNot quite HoHoHo (yet): OOO PROMNEFTSTROY v Yukos: Insolvency and conflict of...
Granted, the (bad) pun in the title would have worked better around the end of year, which is when I had originally planned this posting, before I got sidetracked. Bob Wessels has excellent overview...
View ArticleUniversal: Szpunar AG suggests the Bier case-law does not apply to purely...
I have earlier reported on the referral in Universal, Case C-12/15. Szpunar AG opined today, 11 March (the English text of the Opinion is not yet available at the time I write this post) and suggests...
View ArticleRome II: A manifestly closer connection overrides common habitual residence....
Marshall v MIB [2015] EWHC 3421 (QB) involved a road traffic accident that occurred in France. On 19th August 2012 an uninsured Peugeot motor car registered in France driven by Ms Bivard, a French...
View ArticleConsenting to choice of court under the common law. The Privy Council in...
In Vizcaya v Picard, the Privy Council considered the issue of consent to a choice of court clause in the event no such choice has been made verbatim. It was alleged that choice of court had been made...
View ArticleSchemes of arrangement: No scheming, and no hastily arranging, please. The...
I have reported before on various schemes of arrangement which the English Courts gave the go-ahead even when they concerned non-English companies (I should flag that in two of those, Apcoa and Van...
View ArticleUnjust enrichment under Rome II. The High Court in Banque Cantonale de Genève.
RPC and Sarah Shaul it seems, like me, are hoovering up database backlog – once again thank you to their excellent blog for alerting me to Banque Cantonale de Genève v Polevent. Other than the direct...
View ArticleKokott AG applies Brogsitter in Granarolo: Tort following abrupt ending of...
In Brogsitter, the CJEU held that the fact that one contracting party brings a civil liability claim against the other is not sufficient to consider that the claim concerns ‘matters relating to a...
View ArticleWinkler v Shamoon. Another High Court look at the ‘wills and succession’...
In Winkler v Shamoon [2016] EWHC 2017 Ch Mr Justice Henry Carr broadly follows Mrs Justice Susan Carr in Sabbagh v Khoury (which I have reviewed earlier) on the interpretation of the ‘wills and...
View ArticleThe Pfizer /Allergan collapse: An end to Celtic Cash and a source of...
I shall keep this post short for otherwise it risks developing into a book. In a week which also saw the Panama papers blow a hole in the use of tax havens for individuals, the collapse of the Pfizer...
View Article