Maceió victims v Braskem. Rotterdam court refuses application for Article 34...
Update 1 August 2024 the court has now also held on the merits. Appeal is likely, however the judgment was already declared enforceable: Braskem’s objections [5.62] that this forces it into an...
View ArticleNest Investments v Deloitte. The DIFC Court of Appeal on foreign law is fact...
Nest Investments Holding Lebanon S.A.L. & Ors v Deloitte & Touche (M.E.) & Anor [2023] DIFC CA 012 is of comparative conflict of laws interest on the issue of foreign and domestic law...
View ArticleLott et al v Citroen et al (Dieselgate). An interesting judgment on...
In Lott & Ors v PSA Automobiles SA & Ors [2023] EWHC 2568 (KB), Fontaine SM deals with an evidential /discovery issue in one of the dieselgate cases, where the car manufacturers intend to...
View ArticleX v Y (monies owed on real estate transaction). Court Den Haag leaves hanging...
X v Y (*grumbles his usual grumble about anonymisation*) ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2023:1759 is an interesting judgment discussing, yet not determining, the extent of Rome I’s Article 18’s ‘burden of proof’...
View ArticleMcCarthy v Jones. On lex fori, lex voluntatis, equitable remedies and Spanish...
McCarthy v Jones & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 589 is an appeal from Jones & Anor v McCarthy [2022] EWHC 2186 (Ch) which I had not reported on the blog probably because I had not seen it (it happens...
View ArticleThe PIFFS v Al Wazzan litigation continues with disclosure order viz...
I reported earlier on the jurisdictional issues in a case where PIFSS brings claims for sums totalling in the region of US$874 million, arising from the alleged corruption between 1994 and 2014 of its...
View ArticleNicholls v Mapfre. Yet again, and divergently so, on Spanish interest rates...
Nicholls & Anor v Mapfre Espana Compania de Seguros y Reaseguros SA [2023] EWHC 1031 (KB) yet again discusses the evidence and procedure carve-out in Rome II and its relationship with A15 Rome II...
View ArticleSuppipat v Siam Bank. Unsatisfactory discussion of legal advice privilege and...
Suppipat & Ors v Siam Commercial Bank Public Company Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 381 (Comm) repeats (and indeed refers to) the inadequate discussion of applicable law and privilege in PJSC Tatneft v...
View ArticleJohnson v Berentzen. The doubtful Pandya conclusions on service as lex causae...
Cressida Mawdesley-Thomas has overview of the facts and issues in Johnson v Berentzen & Anor [2021] EWHC 1042 (QB) here. Stacey J essentially confirms the conclusions of Tipples J in Pandya. The...
View ArticleDuffy v Centraal Beheer Achmea. Interim payments qalified as procedural, not...
Update 23 February 2021 see Gilles Cuniberti here on a related issue of the application of the lex causae to interim proceedings, with the French Supreme Court reversing decades of case-law to hold...
View ArticlePJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov. Privilege under English law as lex fori.
Update 24 02 2021 for the subsequent findings on the facts, applying Russian law, see Tatneft PJSC v Bogolyubov & Ors [2021] EWHC 411 (Comm) and my summary of issues here. PJSC Tatneft v...
View ArticleTroke v Amgen. On lex causae for interest and the procedural exception of...
Troke & Anor v Amgen Seguros Generales Compania De Seguros Y Reaseguros SAU (Formerly RACC Seguros Compania De Seguros Y Resaseguros SA) [2020] EWHC 2976 (QB) is an appeal against a decision of the...
View ArticleKMG v CHEN. The common law reflective loss rule held as being substance, not...
KMG International NV v Chen & Anor [2019] EWHC 2389 (Comm) entertains a claim made in tort, based on a breach of duties allegedly owed as a matter of Dutch or alternatively English law. The...
View ArticlePlatinum Partners: Comity no bar to allowing US discovery in Bankruptcy cases.
In Platinum Partners, Chapman J held that foreign discovery laws should be considered for comity concerns, yet they are not determinative of whether discovery should be permitted under United States...
View ArticleThe governing law of privilege. The Dutch courts in re Shell.
This item has been in the queue a long time – apologies. Thank you Marco Vogels for reporting end of 2019 on the Rotterdam court’s approach re privilege in ECLI:NL:RBROT:2019:7856, a criminal...
View ArticlePandya v Intersalonika. Plenty of (appealable?) things to chew on re...
Many thanks 2TG for initially flagging the judgment, and for Maura McIntosh and colleagues not just for further reviewing it but also for sending me copy: for the case has not yet appeared on the usual...
View ArticleArica Victims v Boliden Mineral (Sweden). Lex causae and export of toxic...
I reported earlier on the decision at first instance in Arica Victims v Boliden Mineral. The Court of Appeal has now reversed the finding of Chilean law as lex causae, opting instead for Swedish law....
View ArticleBack to the 80s. Arthur Scargill, submission (voluntary appearance) under...
In [2019] EWHC 1359 (Comm) National Union of Mineworkers v Organisation Internationale de l’energie et des mines defendant is French-domiciled and represented by its chair, Arthur Scargill. That’s...
View ArticleMartins v Dekra Claims. Limitation periods as ‘overriding mandatory rules’...
Case C‑149/18 Martins v Dekra Claims gave the Court of Justice an opportunity (it held end of January) essentially to confirm its Unamar case-law, specifically with respect to limitation periods. The...
View ArticleNational Bank of Kazakhstan v Bank of New York Mellon. Branches’ activities,...
Thank you Ali Malek QC who acts for claimants (and who as I have noted, is a busy and efficient bee in international litigation land) for alerting me to a further episode of Kazakhstan v BNYM. This...
View Article
