Summary
The case was concerned with a company which was registered in 1872 under the Companies Act 1862. The company was incorporated in England with a view to doing business in India. After the Indian independence had been declared in 1947, the company remained an English company.
The claimants, former company directors, brought proceedings in England, alleging that the defendant, company’s director, along with the other defendants engaged in a series of illegal forgeries which intended to affect the ownership and control of the board. They further claimed that their resignation letters and signatures were forged, and as a result a number of decisions of the board were void and illegal. The proceedings were initiated in England on the basis of Article 22(2) of Brussels I.
The English High Court assumed jurisdiction. An injunction was granted, restraining the managing powers of the first defendant, Mr Bhattar. In this context, on 11th Feb 2009, Mr David Donaldson QC held:
“36 Whereas other articles of the Regulation conferring jurisdiction apply only to actions against defendants domiciled in a Member State, Article 22 applies (regardless of domicile). It therefore provides a basis of jurisdiction not only against the company but also against the other defendants. In addition, so far as the company is concerned, jurisdiction is available under Article 2 on the basis of its domicile.
37 Where jurisdiction exists under the Regulation, the court on which it is conferred is obliged to hear and determine the claim even where the potential alternative court is not that of a Member State.” [36-7].
An appeal was made by Mr Bhattar. On 11th Nov 2009, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal.