Article summary
Dispute Resolution analysis: The Court of Appeal has handed down an important and wide-ranging decision concerning key topics relating to conflicts of laws and judicial assistance. The long judgment addresses the role anchor defendants and the correct interpretation of Article 6(1) of Lugano Convention, and analogous provisions in Regulation (EU) Brussels I (recast). The court also addressed the permissibility of stays in favour of states which are not members of either the Lugano or Brussels regimes (third states), concluding that, in theory, English courts have jurisdiction to grant a stay in favour of related proceedings in a third state. The principles as to the exercise of said discretion were also considered, with the court concluding that it was inappropriate to grant a stay on the facts of the current case. The Court of Appeal also discussed the application of principles of forum non conveniens and considers practical matters relating to freezing injunctions, notably non-disclosure and...
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial