In the Courts of the Member State where he is domiciled

(1)

JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS TO HEAR PERSONAL INJURY CASES

WITH A FOREIGN ELEMENT

College of Personal Injury Law 23^rd May 2003, Edinburgh

Philip Mead

Old Square Chambers, London and Bristol

(2)

INTRODUCTION Meaning of “Jurisdiction”

How many legislative regimes apply?

(3)

Scope of this paper

A summary of the provisions in Council Regulation 44/2001

A description of the most common jurisdictional bases Jurisdictional rules under CPR Part 6.20

The allocation of jurisdiction between the different parts of the United Kingdom

The borderline between the European regime under Council Regulation 44/2001 and CPR Part 6.20

(4)

Jurisdiction under Council Regulation 44/2001 Domicile

Jurisdiction is established as of right Rule of special jurisdiction

Concurrent claims in contract and in tort

(5)

Employment Contracts

Article 19 – “An employer domiciled in a Member State may be sued:

1. In the Courts of the Member State where he is domiciled; or 2. In another Member State:

(a) in the courts for the place where the employee habitually carries out his work or in the courts for the last place where he did so, or

(b) if the employee does not or did not habitually carry out his work in any one country, in the courts for the place where the business which engaged the employee is or was situated.”

(6)

ARTICLE 20

“1. An employer may bring proceedings only in the courts of the Member State in which the

employee is domiciled.

2. The provisions of this Section shall not affect the right to bring a counter-claim in the court in which, in accordance with this Section,the original claim is pending.”

(7)

WITH A FOREIGN ELEMENT Co-defendants

Where that Defendant is domiciled in another State but a co-Defendant is domiciled in England (or Wales)

(8)

Jurisdiction under CPR Part 6.20 and the doctrine of forum non conveniens

Permission

(9)

CPR PART 6.21(2A)

England and Wales is the proper place in which to bring a claim

Power to order a stay of proceedings on the basis that

England is an inappropriate forum where (a) the Defendant shows there to be another court with competent jurisdiction which is clearly and distinctly more appropriate than

England and Wales for the trial of the action, and (b) it is not unjust that the Claimant is deprived of the right to trial in England.

(10)

WITH A FOREIGN ELEMENT The Brussels Convention

and Third State Parties

Foreign-domiciled Defendants and English Defendants

(11)

WITH A FOREIGN ELEMENT EXAMPLE 1

A goes on holiday to Spain, injured by B employee of hotel (package holiday)

booked with C (English tour operator)

(12)

A goes on holiday to Spain, injured by B employee of hotel (not a package holiday)

(13)

A goes on holiday to Spain, injured by D driver of vehicle on excursion bought in resort by A, on the recommendation of C (tour operator)

(14)

A passenger in car driven by B (English) in collision with vehicles driven by C (Dutch) and D (German) in Belgium

(15)

A books use of holiday villa in Jamaica

through B (English). Permission is granted by B to use the beach occupied by C and

managed by D (Jamaicans)

(16)

A (English) is employed by B (Jersey) to work in Germany. A is injured at work in Luxembourg.

(17)

A is recruited by B (Jersey) in England to work in Nigeria. The company which has overall control/contact with C, is the UK

parent of the Nigerian subsidiary which had day to day control of the work (D).