Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation

Part IV Procedural and Systemic Issues, 23 Choice-of-Court Agreements: Jurisdictional Conflicts

From: Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments in Europe: The Brussels I Regulation, the Lugano Convention, and the Hague Choice of Court Convention

Trevor C Hartley

From: Oxford Legal Research Library (http://olrl.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights Reserved.date: 05 December 2020

Conflict of instruments — Exclusive forum clauses — Jurisdiction under the Brussels-Lugano Regime — Jurisdiction under the Brussels I Regulation — Jurisdiction under the Brussels II Regulation — Jurisdiction under the Lugano Convention — Jurisdiction under the traditional rules

This chapter considers the problems that arise when an exclusive choice-of-court agreement, which is claimed to be valid, designates a court or the courts of one Member State (the ‘designated’ court), and proceedings are brought in another court (the ‘non-designated’ court). The basic aspects of choice-of-court agreements were discussed in Chapter 13. The chapter now deals with the interaction of these rules with the rules concerning <i>lis pendens</i>, the recognition of judgments, and other matters. It concludes that the only legitimate mechanism for ensuring respect for an exclusive choice-of-court agreement within the EU context is that provided by Brussels 2012, Article 31(2); both antisuit injunctions and actions for damages for ‘wrongful’ litigation are contrary to EU law.

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