Archive for the 'conflict of laws' Category

Koelzsch v État du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg – WLR Daily

Koelzsch v État du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg (Case C-29/10); [2011] WLR (D) 93

“Where an employee carries out activities in more than one contracting state the country in which the employee ‘habitually carries out his work in performance of the contract’, within the meaning of article 6(2)(a) of the Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, was that in which or from which, in the light of all the factors which characterised that activity, the employee performed the greater part of his obligations towards his employer.”

WLR Daily, 15th March 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Carey Group plc and others v AIB Group (UK) plc and another – WLR Daily

Carey Group plc and others v AIB Group (UK) plc and another [2011] EWHC 567 (Ch); [2011] WLR (D) 86

“A person resident or carrying on business in the jurisdiction of England and Wales was at liberty to comply voluntarily with a request or demand of a foreign government agency, based upon foreign public law, without fear of restraint by the English courts, provided only that he thereby committed no wrong actionable under English law.”

WLR Daily, 11th March 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Extradition requests for criminal suspects ‘need better monitoring’ – The Guardian

“A senior UK law officer has urged the home secretary to ensure proper monitoring of extradition requests for criminal suspects between member states in Europe, after the failure to bring a German doctor who accidentally killed a patient on his first UK shift to face justice in Britain.”

Full story

The Guardian, 7th February 2011

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Habibsons Bank Ltd v Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Ltd – WLR Daily

Habibsons Bank Ltd v Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 1335; [2010] WLR (D) 299

“Where, in the course of a contractual transaction, a document had been altered unilaterally, and the other party sought to rely on the rule in Pigot’s case in submitting that the underlying transaction was thereby rendered void, it was important to draw a distinction between documents which contained or evidenced the transaction and documents which were required to carry it into effect.”

WLR Daily, 25th November 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Debt Collect London Ltd and another v SK Slavia Praha-fotbal AS – WLR Daily

Debt Collect London Ltd and another v SK Slavia Praha-fotbal AS [2010] EWCA Civ 1250; [2010] WLR (D) 281

“The proviso in art 30.1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition of judgments in civil and commercial matters (the Judgments Regulation) disapplied the general rule that the court was deemed to be seised of proceedings when they were lodged. Its effect, in a case where there had been a continuing failure by the claimant, having lodged proceedings in the court of one member state, to take the further step of paying the court fee which was required before service could be effected, was to enable the court of another member state in which proceedings had later been issued nevertheless to be deemed to have been first seised of proceedings between the same parties.”

WLR Daily, 5th November 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Wood Floor Solutions Andreas Domberger GmbH v Silva Trade SA – WLR Daily

Wood Floor Solutions Andreas Domberger GmbH v Silva Trade SA (Case C-19/09); [2010] WLR (D) 77

“Where services were provided in several member states of the European Union, the court which had jurisdiction to hear and determine all the claims arising from the contract was the court in whose jurisdiction the place of the main provision of services was situated. For a commercial agency contract, that place was the place of the main provision of services by the agent, as it appeared from the provisions of the contract or, in the absence of such provisions, the actual performance of that contract or, where it could not be established on that basis, the place where the agent was domiciled.”

WLR Daily, 18th March 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been full reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Cavel USA, Inc and another v Seaton Insurance Co and another – WLR Daily

Cavel USA, Inc and another v Seaton Insurance Co and another [2009] EWCA Civ 1363; [2009] WLR (D) 369

“The concept of fraud in the English commercial law context in a case having an international flavour was much wider than the concept of deceit flowing from a fraudulent misrepresentation and could extend to cases without the need to establish the element of dishonesty of the person against whom the fraud was alleged.”

WLR Daily, 17th December 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

In re I (A Child) – WLR Daily

In re I (A Child) [2009] UKSC 10; [2009] WLR (D) 351

“The right of parties in child contact proceedings to opt in to the jurisdiction of an EU country which would not otherwise have jurisdiction to determine the child’s future, contained in art 12.3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 on jurisdiction and enforcement in matrimonial and parental responsibility matters (‘Brussels II Revised’), could apply when the child was habitually resident outside the European Union.”

WLR Daily, 3rd December 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Rome I comes into force, clarifies whose laws apply to contract disputes – OUT-LAW.com

“Companies that negotiate contracts without specifying which country’s law should govern any contractual disputes between them will face a new legal regime in two weeks’ time. From 17th December, a new EU law, Rome I, will decide which law should apply.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 3rd December 2009

Source: www.out-law.com

Martin v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions – WLR Daily

Martin v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2009] EWCA Civ 1289; [2009] WLR (D) 346 

“Although English law might be the law applicable to the question whether a property in France, registered in the name of an income benefit claimant domiciled in England, was held on an implied trust for another, nevertheless, where the whole focus of the admitted common intentions of the claimant and the alleged beneficiary was on the provisions of French succession law as having the closest connection to the property, a social security commissioner was entitled to conclude that French law applied, with the result that there was no implied trust, the claimant was the beneficial owner of the property, and his capital, for income support purposes, exceeded the prescribed amount.”

WLR Daily, 27th November 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Catalyst Investment Group Ltd v Lewinsohn and others; Catalyst Investment Group Ltd and another v Lewinsohn and another; ARM Asset-Backed Securities SA v Lewinsohn and another – WLR Daily

Catalyst Investment Group Ltd v Lewinsohn and others; Catalyst Investment Group Ltd and another v Lewinsohn and another; ARM Asset-Backed Securities SA v Lewinsohn and another [2009] EWHC 1964 (Ch); [2009] WLR (D) 281

“Where corresponding proceedings were in existence between the same parties in another jurisdiction, the court had no power to grant a stay, in favour of the courts of a non-EU country, of proceedings of which the court was properly seised under art 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.”

WLR Daily, 6th August 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Deutsche Bank AG and another v Highland Crusader Offshore Partners LLP and others – WLR Daily

Deutsche Bank AG and another v Highland Crusader Offshore Partners LLP and others [2009] EWCA Civ 725; [2009] WLR (D) 254

“There was no presumption that the prosecution of foreign litigation in parallel with litigation in England pursuant to a non-exclusive jurisdiction clause was of itself vexatious and oppressive unless exceptional circumstances could be shown to justify it.”

WLR Daily, 24th July 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Allianz SpA and Another v West Tankers Inc – Times Law Reports

Allianz SpA and Another v West Tankers Inc

Court of Justice of the European Communities

“It was not open to a court in one European Union member state to order a party in a case before it to discontinue proceedings begun by that party in another member state on the ground that the parties had agreed to refer any disputes between them to arbitration in the first state.”

The Times, 13th February 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Allianz SpA and another v West Tankers Inc – WLR Daily

Allianz SpA and another v West Tankers Inc (Case C-185/07); [2009] WLR (D) 44

“It was incompatible with Regulation 44/2001 for a court of an EC member state to make an order to restrain a person from commencing or continuing proceedings before the courts of another member state on the ground that such proceedings would be contrary to an arbitration agreement.”

WLR Daily, 11th February 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

English court can’t stop Italian lawsuit despite arbitration agreement, ECJ says – OUT-LAW.com

“An English court cannot order someone not to take action in an Italian court in a civil matter even though there was an agreement between the companies involved to settle disputes through arbitration in London, the ECJ has ruled.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 11th February 2009

Source: www.out-law.com

Guidance on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II) – Ministry of Justice

“A guide to the main provisions in the European Community regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II), which came into force on 11 January 2009.”

Full story

Ministry of Justice, 9th February 2009

Source: www.justice.gov.uk

Maher and Maher v Groupama Grand Est – WLR Daily

Maher and Maher v Groupama Grand Est; [2009] WLR (D) 21

On a personal injury claim brought by English claimants against French insurers in respect of a road traffic accident in France in 2005 damages were to be assessed by reference to English law, not French law, but the issue whether there was a right to claim interest by way of damages was to be determined under French law, though any question about the rate of interest was to be determined under English law.”

WLR Daily, 26th January 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

European regulation on law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) – Ministry of Justice

“Justice Minister Lord Bach has made a statement announcing the UK’s participation in the European Community regulation on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I).”

Full press release

Ministry of Justice, 22nd January 2009

Source: www.justice.gov.uk

Gomez and others v Gomez-Vives and others – WLR Daily

Gomez and others v Gomez-Vives and others [2008] EWCA Civ 1065; [2008] WLR (D) 305

“The fact that a trust was expressed to be subject to English law might not be conclusive to establish its domicile in England but it was very difficult to see what other circumstances would be sufficient to outweigh it.”

WLR Daily, 3rd October 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

ETI Euro Telecom International NV v Republic of Bolivia and another – WLR Daily

ETI Euro Telecom International NV v Republic of Bolivia and another [2008] EWCA Civ 880; [2008] WLR (D) 263

“International arbitration proceedings were not ‘proceedings’ for the purpose of s 25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 to enable the English court to grant interim relief to preserve the outcome of the arbitration proceedings. Where injunctive relief was sought in the English court, the claimant should deal both with state immunity from the adjudicative jurisdiction of the court and with state immunity from enforcement. The court should consider and decide the question of state immunity at as early a stage on the proceedings as practicable.”

WLR Daily, 29th July 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

McGrath and Others v Riddell and Another – Times Law Reports

McGrath and Others v Riddell and Another

House of Lords

“The fact that in a country of principal winding-up of a company in liquidation there would be a class of preferential creditors who would not have priority under English insolvency law was insufficient reason for an English court to refuse to exercise its discretion, under section 426 of the Insolvency Act 1986, to order remission of assets located in England to the country of principal winding-up.”

The Times, 11th April 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

McGrath and others v Riddell and another [2008] UKHL 21 – WLR Daily

McGrath and others v Riddell and another [2008] UKHL 21; [2008] WLR (D) 101

If the country of the principal winding up of an insolvent company was a designated ‘relevant country’ for the purposes of s 426 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and the insolvency laws of that country would involve a pari passu distribution of assets to ordinary unsecured creditors, then an English court should accede to a request to remit assets located in England to the principal liquidators for distribution according to the foreign law even if, under that law, there would be a class of preferential creditors who would not have had priority under English insolvency law.”

WLR Daily, 10th April 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Westminster City Council v IC (a protected party by his litigation friend) and others – WLR Daily

Westminster City Council v IC (a protected party by his litigation friend) and others [2008] EWCA Civ 198; [2008] WLR (D) 92

A judge did not have jurisdiction to make a declaration that a marriage based on lack of consent was not valid under English law, since such a marriage was voidable and not void ab intitio. The judge should have declared that the marriage was not recognised as a valid marriage in this jurisdiction.”

WLR Daily, 20th March 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Jose Gonzalez Gomez and others v Encarnacion Gomez-Monche Vives and others – WLR Daily

Jose Gonzalez Gomez and others v Encarnacion Gomez-Monche Vives and others [2008] EWHC 259 (Ch); [2008] WLR (D) 50

“The words ‘as beneficiary’ contained in art 5(6) of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001, which provided that a person domiciled in a member state could, in another member state, be sued ‘as … beneficiary of a trust’, required the claimants to show that they were suing a party in its capacity as a beneficiary rather than in the capacity as someone not beneficially entitled to the moneys that were claimed.”

WLR Daily, 19th February 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Pleae note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.


C v D (London arbitration clause) – Times Law Reports

C v D (London arbitration clause)

Court of Appeal

“Although the governing law of a liability insurance contract was that of New York, where the contract contained a London arbitration clause, the parties were to be taken to have agreed that the arbitration award could be challenged only in English law proceedings because of the choice of London as the seat of the arbitration.”

The Times, 16th January 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Islamic Republic of Iran v Barakat Galleries Ltd – Times Law Reports

Islamic Republic of Iran v Barakat Galleries Ltd

Court of Appeal

“A claim by a state to recover antiquities which formed part of its national heritage should not be shut out on the ground that an action whose object was to enforce the public law of another state should not be entertained.”

The Times, 7th January 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

C v D – WLR Daily

C v D [2007] EWCA Civ 1282

“Parties to a liability insurance contract in the Bermuda form providing for the contract to be governed by New York law but with arbitration in London were to be taken as having agreed, by choosing London as the seat of the arbitration, that proceedings on the arbitration award were only those permitted by English law.”

WLR Daily, 6th December 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Freeport plc v Arnoldsson (Case C-98/06) – WLR Daily

Freeport plc v Arnoldsson (Case C-98/06)

“The fact that claims brought against a number of defendants had different legal bases did not preclude application of the provision in art 6(1) of Regulation 44/2001 (the successor to the Brussels Convention of 1968) that in certain circumstances multiple defendants could be sued in the courts of the domicile of any of them.”

WLR Daily, 11th October 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Grovit v. De Netherlandsche Bank NV and others – WLR Daily

Grovit v. De Netherlandsche Bank NV and others

“An action for libel against the central bank of the Netherlands was not a civil and commercial matter within the terms of Council Regulation 44/2001/EC (the Judgments Regulation on jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters) so as to permit the action to go ahead in the English courts.”

WLR Daily, 24th July 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

AWB Geneva SA and another v. North America Steamships Ltd. – WLR Daily

AWB Geneva SA and another v. North America Steamships Ltd. [2007] EWHC 1167 (Comm) 

“A party to a contract that was subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English High Court could not restrain the other party’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.”

WLR Daily, 17th May 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Color Drack GmbH v. Lexx International Vertriebs GmbH – WLR Daily

Color Drack GmbH v. Lexx International Vertriebs GmbH (Case C-386/05) 

“Where under a contract goods were delivered to several places in the same EC member state, it was the place of principal delivery in that state, determined on the basis of economic criteria, that had jurisdiction in disputes on the contract.”

WLR Daily, 3rd May 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Moore v. Moore – Times Law Reports

Keeping court informed in overlapping jurisdictions

Moore v. Moore

Court of Appeal

“In cases involving overlapping proceedings in different jurisdictions there should be someone on each team who was able to inform both courts of the progress of the case in the other jurisdiction.”

The Times, 25th April 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Bentinck v. Bentinck – Times Law Reports

Staying proceedings to save costs

Bentinck v. Bentinck

Court of Appeal

“Even when there was no error in a first-instance judgment in a family case concerning conflict of laws, it was not only open to the Court of Appeal, but incumbent upon it to avoid any further wastage of costs and stay the English proceedings until the foreign court had decided whether it was first seised of the matter.”

The Times, 12th April 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication. 


December 2020
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Categories