Commercial Court gives guidance on definition of ‘consumer’ under Recast Brussels Regulation in cryptocurrency futures trading case

22 May, 2019
An individual investor, with substantial means and more knowledge and experience than the average person, may still be considered a ‘consumer’ for the purposes of Article 17 of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (“Recast Brussels Regulation“), even when contracting to trade a specialised product such … Read more

Court of Appeal finds ISDA jurisdiction clause trumps competing clause in related contract

21 May, 2019
The Court of Appeal’s judgment in BNP Paribas SA v Trattamento Rifiuti Metropolitani SPA provides further assurance that jurisdiction clauses within standard form ISDA documentation will not readily be displaced by contrary jurisdiction clauses in related contracts. The Court of Appeal gave effect to an English jurisdiction clause in an ISDA Master Agreement over an apparently competing … Read more

Court of Appeal finds ISDA jurisdiction clause trumps ‘theoretically competing’ clause in separate agreement governing wider relationship

15 August, 2018
Consistent with recent authority, the Court of Appeal has given primacy to an English jurisdiction clause in an ISDA Master Agreement (overturning the first instance decision that had declined to do so), in circumstances where there was a “theoretically competing” jurisdiction clause in a separate agreement governing the wider relationship: Deutsche Bank AG v Comune di … Read more

High Court holds ISDA jurisdiction clause trumps competing jurisdiction clause in separate but related agreement

25 July, 2018
The decision of the High Court in BNP Paribas SA v Trattamento Rifiuti Metropolitani SPA [2018] EWHC 1670 (Comm) confirms that an express agreement to the jurisdiction of the English court within standard form ISDA documentation will not easily be displaced or restricted. The court found that the jurisdiction clause in a 1992 ISDA Master Agreement was effective … Read more

Jurisdiction clause in derivatives contract interpreted as granting exclusive jurisdiction to English courts

30 October, 2015
The High Court has interpreted a jurisdiction clause as granting exclusive jurisdiction to the English courts, despite the absence of the word “exclusive” in the clause in question: Global Maritime Investments Cyprus Limited v O.W. Supply & Trading A/S [2015] EWHC 2690 (Comm). A well drafted jurisdiction clause should make clear that exclusive jurisdiction is … Read more

Goldman Sachs & Ors v Novo Banco: Commercial Court considers Recast Brussels Regulation

07 October, 2015
The recent decision of the Commercial Court in Goldman Sachs International and Others v Novo Banco S.A.[2015] EWHC 2371 (Comm) is one of the first to consider the English court’s jurisdiction under the recast Brussels Regulation (Council Regulation (EU) 1215/2012) (the “Brussels Regulation“) and as such puts our Handy Guide to Jurisdiction under the Recast Brussels Regulation to the … Read more

Reforms to Brussels Regulation now finalised

12 December, 2012
On 6 December the Council of EU Justice Ministers adopted proposed reforms to Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (the Brussels Regulation). The changes had been proposed by the European Commission in December 2010 (see post) but were significantly revised before being approved by … Read more

Unilateral jurisdiction clauses may not always be effective

13 November, 2012
It is not uncommon, particularly in a finance context, for an agreement to give a wider choice to some parties than others to decide where disputes will be resolved. For example, an agreement may provide that the courts of a particular country have exclusive jurisdiction, but some of the parties, such as the lender, can … Read more