Search for: "Owusu v. Ins*"
Results 1 - 20
of 29
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Nov 2020, 1:14 pm
New Article: Shaun Ossei-Owusu, Civil v. [read post]
9 May 2013, 6:08 am
Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued an opinion in Owusu-Ansah v. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 4:51 pm
The appeal Mr Kennedy appealed, arguing that the availability of forum non conveniens arguments was restricted where the Brussels Recast Regulation 2012/2015 (“Regulation”) applied and, further, that judicial discretion under section 49 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 was now heavily restricted, by virtue of the decision in Owusu v Jackson [2005] QB 801. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 5:00 am
Oregon v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 12:40 am
Michael Bloch QC, for Lucasfilm, urged that the court assert subject-matter jurisdiction and enforce the US copyrights; this was advanced on three bases: 1. in light of the decision in Owusu (C-281/02) the English court is under a duty to accept such jurisdiction; 2. that such jurisdiction in respect of copyright enforcement was in any case established by the Court of Appeal in Pearce v Ove Arup [2000] Ch. 403; or 3. in the absence of compulsory jurisdiction, there remains a… [read post]
23 Jul 2017, 4:53 pm
In NTL COLLEGIATE STNDT LN TRUST 2005-1 v. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 4:11 pm
Forum non conveniens The Claimant relied on EU case law (Owusu v Jackson (C-281/2002) and Maletic v lastminute.com GmbH (C-478-12)) to argue that the court was precluded from considering forum non conveniens issues. [read post]
10 Jun 2012, 7:37 am
Owusu. [read post]
18 Oct 2017, 2:22 am
Vedanta has focused their argument on the fact that Article 4 of the Brussels I Regulation Recast does not automatically allow an English-domiciled parent company to be sued in England and, despite the CJEU’s ruling in Owusu v Jackson, there is always discretion as to whether the English court should allow the claims to be tried in England. [read post]
28 Dec 2020, 4:31 pm
Owusu (2005) concerned proceedings for breach of contract and negligence brought in England by an English-domiciled claimant in respect of a very serious injury he had suffered in a diving accident which occurred at a holiday resort in Jamaica. [read post]
15 Feb 2021, 2:54 am
by Professor Dr Eva-Maria Kieninger, Chair for German and European Private Law and Private International Law, University of Würzburg, Germany The Supreme Court’s decision in Okpabi v Royal Dutch Shell (2021 UKSC 3) concerns the preliminary question whether English courts have jurisdiction over a joint claim brought by two Nigerian communities against Royal Dutch Shell (RSD), a UK parent company, as anchor defendant, and a Nigerian oil company (SPDC) in which RSD held 30 % of the… [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 5:00 am
United States v. [read post]
20 May 2013, 9:54 am
CRUMPTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. [read post]
30 Jan 2019, 8:42 am
This morning, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in Conversant Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L v Huawei Technologies Co. [read post]
29 Dec 2020, 4:05 pm
The rule in Diamond v Sutton, if it exists, would require the English courts with effect from 1 January 2021 to adopt a position fundamentally at variance with the Brussels Regime and the rationale of the judgments in Owusu, eDate Advertising and Bolagsupplysningen. [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 4:56 am
People v. [read post]
23 Jun 2016, 1:06 pm
Mr Justice Coulson placed considerable weight on the decision of the Court of Justice of European Union (“CJEU”) in Owusu v Jackson preventing UK courts from declining jurisdiction on the basis of the forum non conveniens, when the defendant is domiciled in the UK. [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 4:09 pm
The section does not apply to any claims where jurisdiction has been taken under the Regulation or the Lugano Convention, as in those cases the defendant can be sued “as of right” – wherever the claimant is situated – under the rule in C-281/02 Owusu v Jackson [2005] QB 801. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 12:50 am
On 30 January 2009, the Irish Supreme Court decided in Goshawk Dedicated Limited and Kite Dedicated Limited formerly known as Goshawk Dedicated (No. 2) Ltd, and Cavell Management Services Ltd, and Cavell Managing Agency Ltd v. [read post]
