- Interpreting service gateways and determining forum conveniens (Ditto Ltd v Drive-Thru Records LLC (a limited liability partnership registered under the laws of the State of California))
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: Deputy Master Francis considered the jurisdictional gateways for service out in CPR PD 6B para 3.1 for contract claims, tort claims and property within the jurisdiction. The Master considered: (i) that the contract claim gateway was met, concluding that the contract had been made in two jurisdictions (England and California) at the same time, and (ii) the tort gateway was satisfied. Having reached that decision, the property within the jurisdiction gateway point was not substantively determined. However, having concluded that the gateways for service out were met, the Master further held that the most natural forum for the claim was California, not England, notwithstanding that the defendants' counterclaim had not been commenced there (but rather had been commenced in New York). The service out order was, accordingly, set aside. The Master also considered, albeit briefly, the obligations of full and frank disclosure in ex parte applications and concluded that any failure to disclose information on the part of the claimant had been inadvertent and/or innocent, and not serious enough to warrant that the service out order be set aside (albeit that the Master did set aside the aside the order for other reasons). Written by Michael Rhode, senior associate at Trowers & Hamlins LLP.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial