Search for: "State v. Owusu"
Results 1 - 20
of 39
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Nov 2023, 12:45 pm
Freedom of Religious Associations and Gaum v. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 10:00 am
Hugh’s College, University of Oxford; Global Professor of Law, NYU School of Law "Equity, banking, and the seeds of crisis: Foley v Hill (1838-48)" October 11 Brittany Farr, Assistant Professor of Law, NYU School of Law "The Other Walker-Thomas: Reading Race in Contracts" October 25 Shaun Ossei-Owusu, Presidential Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School "Social Engineers on a Grand Scale? [read post]
3 Aug 2023, 4:49 am
The objection of forum non conveniens does not apply in the Brussels I Regulation system (as clarified in the CJEU’s Owusu decision). [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 12:20 pm
Owusu v. [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]
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]
24 Aug 2019, 6:30 am
Citizens, 1919-1924Conveners: Kenneth Mack, Harvard Law School (kmack@law.harvard.edu), Laurie Wood, Florida State University (lmwood@fsu.edu), Jacqueline Briggs, University of Toronto - Centre for Criminology and Sociolegal Studies (jacq.briggs@mail.utoronto.ca), and John Wertheimer, Davidson College (jow [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]
16 Apr 2019, 7:29 am
Issues for the Supreme Court In considering the appeal, the Supreme Court addressed the following issues: whether there had been an abuse of EU law by the claimants in relying on Article 4 of the Brussels Regulation Recast to establish jurisdiction over Vedanta as anchor defendant for the purpose of attracting the English courts’ jurisdiction over the claim against KCM, “the real targets of the claim”; whether the claimants’ pleaded case and supporting evidence disclosed no… [read post]
1 Feb 2019, 12:44 pm
Christelle Chalas & Richard Fentiman, Judicial discretion (From Bhopal to Brexit): Owusu v. [read post]
30 Jan 2019, 8:42 am
The judgment goes through the background of licensing in the SEP area, quoting from the Court of Appeal's judgment in Unwired Planet, and explained briefly the wider fight between the companies, which includes proceedings commenced in China by Huawei China and ZTE China against Conversant seeking to invalidate Conversant's Chinese patents and seeking a FRAND determination.Jurisdiction over UK defendantsThe Court addressed the position as against the two UK domiciled appellants,… [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 11:00 pm
Following the CJEU’s decision in Owusu, the general rule of domicile under Article 4 of Brussels I has a mandatory effect in the proceedings against English-domiciled parent company and claimants cannot rely onthe doctrine of forum non conveniens under English traditional rules. [read post]
18 Apr 2018, 2:25 pm
On the other hand, the CJEU in Owusu v Jackson [2005] QB 801 held that an English Court could not apply the doctrine of forum non conveniens to decline jurisdiction over a claim against a European domiciliary on the ground that the natural forum for the claims was outside Europe (albeit the CJEU in that case did not state whether this doctrine applied in cases concerned with the subject matter of Art 24). [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]
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]
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]
22 Aug 2017, 9:10 am
THE CAST OF PLAYERS OWNER TRUSTEE: Wilmington Trust Company is a Delaware banking corporation with its principal place of business in the State of Delaware. [read post]
23 Jul 2017, 4:53 pm
In NTL COLLEGIATE STNDT LN TRUST 2005-1 v. [read post]
11 Oct 2016, 3:26 am
There is no question of staying the proceedings on the basis of forum non conveniens because Associated Newspapers Limited is an English company and there is, therefore, an absolute right for a claimant to sue it in the courts of this country under Article 2 of the Brussels Convention (see the decision of the CJEU in Owusu v Jackson [2005] QB 801). [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]
