Asaad v Kurter: The latest round in ‘non-marriage’ cases – is the tide turning? – Family Law Week

Posted February 14th, 2014 in conflict of laws, divorce, marriage, news by sally

‘Lily Mottahedan, barrister at 1 Hare Court, examines the court’s approach in determining whether a marriage was a “non-marriage” or a “void” or “valid” in the recent High Court judgment in Asaad v Kurter [2013] EWHC 3852 (Fam).’

Full story

Family Law Week, 12th February 2014

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Corman-Collins SA v La Maison du Whisky SA – WLR Daily

Posted January 9th, 2014 in conflict of laws, contracts, EC law, jurisdiction, law reports, regulations by sally

Corman-Collins SA v La Maison du Whisky SA (Case C-9/12); [2013] WLR (D) 513

‘The rule of jurisdiction laid down in the second indent of article 5(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 for disputes relating to contracts for the supply of services was applicable in the case of a legal action by which a claimant established in one member state claimed, against a defendant established in another member state, rights arising from an exclusive distribution agreement, which required the contract binding the parties to contain specific terms concerning the distribution by the distributor of goods sold by the grantor. It was for the national court to ascertain whether that was the case in the before it.’

WLR Daily, 19th December 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

The Court of Appeal on Cartels and Conflicts – Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers

Posted November 25th, 2013 in appeals, competition, conflict of laws, damages, jurisdiction, news by tracey

‘The Court of Appeal handed down two important decisions last week on the application of conflict of law principles to cartel follow-on damages claims: Deutsche Bahn AG & Ors v Morgan Advanced Materials plc & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 1484 and Ryanair Limited v Esso Italiana Srl [2013] EWCA Civ 1450. The defendants in each case challenged the jurisdiction of the English courts to hear damages claims arising from their cartel activities.’

Full story

Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 24th November 2013

Source: www.competitionbulletin.com

Are the Alarm Bells Ringing? Identifying a potential Hague Convention case and responding appropriately – Family Law Week

Posted November 25th, 2013 in child abduction, conflict of laws, foreign jurisdictions, news by tracey

‘Mandeep Gill, associate solicitor with The International Family Law Group LLP, considers the recent cautionary reminder given by Mr Justice Bodey that all practitioners must be able to identify whether there are potential Hague Convention implications in any children case with an international element.’

Full story

Family Law week, 22nd November 2013

Source:  www.familylawweek.co.uk

Maletic and another v lastminute.com and another – WLR Daily

Maletic and another v lastminute.com and another (Case C-478/12); [2013] WLR (D) 444

“The concept of ‘other party to the contract’ laid down in article 16(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L12, p 1)also covered the contracting partner of the operator with which the consumer concluded that contract and which had its registered office in the member state in which the consumer was domiciled.”

WLR Daily, 14th November 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Emrek v Sabranovic – WLR Daily

Emrek v Sabranovic: (Case C-218/12);   [2013] WLR (D)  390

“Article 15(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters did not require the existence of a causal link between the means employed to direct the commercial or professional activity to the member state of the consumer’s domicile. However, the existence of such a causal link constituted evidence of the connection between the contract and such activity.”

WLR Daily, 17th October 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Mittal v Mittal – WLR Daily

Mittal v Mittal: [2013] EWCA Civ ;   [2013] WLR (D)  391

“Paragraph 9 of Schedule 1 to the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973 gave the courts of England and Wales jurisdiction to stay matrimonial proceedings in favour of competing prior proceedings in a non-member state.”

WLR Daily, 18th October 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Pinckney v KDG Mediatech AG – WLR Daily

Posted October 7th, 2013 in conflict of laws, copyright, internet, jurisdiction, law reports by sally

Pinckney v KDG Mediatech AG (Case C-170/12); [2013] WLR (D) 367

“In the event of alleged infringement of copyrights protected by the member state of the court seised, the latter had jurisdiction to hear an action to establish liability brought by the author of a work against a company established in another member state and which had, in the latter state, reproduced that work on a material support which was subsequently sold by companies established in a third member state through an Internet site also accessible with the jurisdiction of the court seised. That court had jurisdiction only to determine the damage caused in the member state within which it was situated.”

WLR Daily, 3rd October 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Proceedings brought by Schneider – WLR Daily

Posted October 7th, 2013 in conflict of laws, EC law, guardianship, jurisdiction, law reports, sale of land by sally

Proceedings brought by Schneider (Case C-386/12); [2013] WLR (D) 366

“Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, and, in particular article 22(1) thereof in relation to jurisdiction in proceedings concerning rights in rem in immoveable property, did not apply to non-contentious proceedings by which a national of a member state who had been declared to be lacking full capacity and placed under guardianship in that member state had applied to a court in another member state for authorisation to sell his share of a property situated in that other member state.”

WLR Daily, 3rd October 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Sunico ApS and others – WLR Daily

Posted September 19th, 2013 in conflict of laws, damages, EC law, fraud, HM Revenue & Customs, law reports, news, VAT by sally

Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Sunico ApS and others (Case C-49/12); [2013] WLR (D) 347

“The concept of ‘civil and commercial matters’ within the meaning of article 1(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 covered an action whereby a public authority of one member state claimed, as against natural and legal persons resident in another member state, damages for loss caused by a tortious conspiracy to commit value added tax fraud in the first member state.”

WLR Daily, 12th September 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Schlecker (trading as Firma Anton Schlecker) v Boedeker – WLR Daily

Schlecker (trading as Firma Anton Schlecker) v Boedeker: (Case C-64/12);   [2013] WLR (D)  346

“Article 6(2) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980, meant that even where an employee carried out the work in performance of the contract habitually, for a lengthy period and without interruption in the same country, the national court could, under the concluding part of that provision, disregard the law of the country where the work was habitually carried out, if it appeared from the circumstances as a whole that the contract was more closely connected with another country.”

WLR Daily, 12th September 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Apex Global Management Ltd v Fi Call Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted June 13th, 2013 in appeals, conflict of laws, immunity, law reports, royal family by sally

Apex Global Management Ltd v Fi Call Ltd and others [2013] EWCA Civ 642; [2013] WLR (D) 228

“The phrase ‘members of his family forming part of his household’ in section 20(1)(b) of the State Immunity Act 1978 should not be given a wider meaning in relation to heads of state than it had in relation to diplomats. Thus a head of state’s ‘household’ was restricted to spouses, civil partners, dependent children and relatives.”

WLR Daily, 11th June 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Melzer v MF Global UK Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted May 24th, 2013 in conflict of laws, EC law, jurisdiction, law reports by tracey

Melzer v MF Global UK Ltd: (Case C-228/11); [2013] WLR (D) 196

“The special jurisdiction in matters relating to tort under article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 was not applicable where, in a case in which several people acting in different member states took part in allegedly harmful events, the action was brought against one of them who had not acted within the jurisdiction of the court seised, on the basis of a harmful event imputed to an accomplice or joint participant who was within the jurisdiction of the court, but who was not a party to the dispute.”

WLR Daily, 16th May 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Apex Global Management Ltd v FI Call Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted March 26th, 2013 in conflict of laws, immunity, law reports, royal family by sally

Apex Global Management Ltd v FI Call Ltd and others [2013] EWHC 587 (Ch); [2013] WLR (D) 111

On the proper construction of section 20(1)(b) of the State Immunity Act 1978, whilst an adult member of a sovereign’s or head of state’s family exercising royal or presidential, constitutional and representational functions could be regarded in some circumstances as a member of the sovereign’s or head of state’s household, even though he or she lived apart from the sovereign or head of state, such a situation would be rare, and would be likely to be restricted to the case of a regent, heir to the throne or a person broadly exercising the sovereign’s or head of state’s functions in a full time capacity on his behalf.

WLR Daily, 19th March 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Subsidiaries as “branches” for undertakings: a new route to jurisdiction under Article 5(5) of the Brussels Regulation? – Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers

Posted February 15th, 2013 in competition, conflict of laws, EC law, jurisdiction, news, subsidiary companies by sally

“Stand alone, follow on and hybrid damages claims arising out of multijurisdictional cartels are generating some of the most novel and interesting current problems in conflicts of laws, both in relation to issues of jurisdiction and applicable law. On the jurisdictional side conventional wisdom has it that there are three main routes by which Claimants can seize English jurisdiction.”

Full story

Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 14th February 2013

Source: www.competitionbulletin.com

Folien Fischer AG and another v Ritrama SpA (Case C-133/11) – WLR Daily

Posted October 29th, 2012 in competition, conflict of laws, EC law, jurisdiction, law reports by sally

Folien Fischer AG and another v Ritrama SpA (Case C-133/11); [2012] WLR (D) 292

“An action for a negative declaration seeking to establish the absence of liability in tort, delict, or quasi-delict fell within the scope of article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L12, p 1).”

WLR Daily, 25th October 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

In re L (A Child) (Recognition of Foreign Order) – WLR Daily

In re  L (A Child) (Recognition of Foreign Order): [2012] EWCA Civ 1157;   [2012] WLR (D)  252

“The English court would not refuse recognition of a parental agreement freely reached in a member state of the European Union unless a party seeking to challenge it showed a very high degree of procedure or principle error which led to the conclusion and ratification of the agreement in the country where the child was habitually resident at the time of the agreement. A child’s two monthly rotational residence in England lacked degree of permanence to find habitual residence in England for the English court to make a residence order.”

WLR Daily, 21st August 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Arbitration News: Sulamerica – the law governing an agreement to arbitrate – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted July 27th, 2012 in arbitration, conflict of laws, injunctions, insurance, news by sally

“In Sulamerica Cia Nacional De Seguros S.A. v Enesa Engenharia S.A. [2012] EWCA Civ 638 the Court of Appeal explored (amongst other things) the question of how the law governing an arbitration agreement in the absence of express choice is to be determined.”

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 18th July 2012

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Yukos Capital Sarl v OJSC Rosneft Oil Co (No 2) – WLR Daily

Posted June 29th, 2012 in arbitration, conflict of laws, enforcement, law reports, state immunity by tracey

Yukos Capital Sarl v OJSC Rosneft Oil Co (No 2): [2012] EWCA Civ 855;  [2012] WLR (D)  186

“Act of state doctrines did not go so far as to prevent examination of the substantial justice available in the courts of foreign jurisdictions, whether in a particular case or on a systemic basis. Where there was a jurisdiction to enforce a foreign award, it was open to the court to look at whether the case had been fairly decided. Where a party to the litigation was asking the English court to recognise a foreign court decision, the English court must be entitled to decide whether or not to enforce the foreign court decision.”

WLR Daily, 27th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and others – WLR Daily

Posted June 22nd, 2012 in appeals, assets recovery, company law, conflict of laws, fraud, law reports by tracey

VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and others: [2012] EWCA Civ 808; [2012] WLR (D) 181

“There was no such thing in English law as a ‘remedial constructive contract’ and the courts had no jurisdiction to subject parties to contractual obligations under a contract to which neither they, not the only undisputed parties to the contract had ever agreed or intended they should be subject. The Court of Appeal was bound to uphold the principle that it was appropriate to pierce the corporate veil only where special circumstances existed indicating that it was only a façade concealing the true facts. The veil-piercing principle had been developed pragmatically for the purpose of providing a practical solution in particular factual circumstances and could not be invoked wherever it was necessary to do so in the interests of justice and no unconnected third party was involved.”

WLR Daily, 20th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk