Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation

5 Effects of asymmetric jurisdiction clauses under the Recast and 2007 Lugano Convention and their relationship with Third State court proceedings

From: Asymmetric Jurisdiction Clauses

Brooke Marshall

From: Oxford Legal Research Library (http://olrl.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2023. All Rights Reserved.date: 21 April 2024

Choice of court and jurisdictional agreements — Applicable law — Jurisdiction under the Brussels-Lugano Regime — Jurisdictional agreement — Jurisdiction under the Lugano Convention

This Chapter explores the effects of asymmetric jurisdiction agreements under the EU’s Brussels I Recast Regulation and 2007 Lugano Convention before EU Member State courts. It examines the particular circumstance where multiple proceedings are on foot — whether in two EU Member State courts or in one EU Member State court and one Third State court — and at least one of those proceedings is pursuant to an asymmetric clause. The Chapter addresses the issue of effects by asking what the intended and actual effects of asymmetric jurisdiction agreements on the competence of EU Member State courts are, and which court should decide these questions. The Chapter demonstrates that the Brussels I Recast Regulation will, in some intra-EU cases and in many cases involving a Third State, produce a result that the parties, or at least the drafting party, did not intend. It suggests two key solutions for asymmetric jurisdiction clauses in circulation.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.