EUPillar Commercial Marine Piling Ltd v Pierse Contracting Ltd [2009] EWHC 2241 (TCC).

Summary

An English company, Pierse UK, had to construct a new ferry terminal in the Port of Belfast. The project included piling work. Pierse UK subcontracted the pilling work to another English company, Commercial Maritime Piling (CMP). The defendant, Pierse Ireland, provided a guarantee to pay any money which could be due by Pierse UK. Pierse UK went into liquidation. On 21st May 2009, the claimant, CMP, commenced an action in England against the defendant, Pierse Ireland, for the money due for the piling work. The defendant challenged the jurisdiction of the English court. On 11th September 2009, the English High Court dismissed the challenge. A central issue was where Pierse Ireland’s obligation was to be performed. To this end, the applicable law had to be determined. The presumption of Article 4(2) of the Rome Convention was displaced because the contract was more closely connected with England. Hence, English law was applicable. On this basis, it was concluded that the place of performance of the obligation in question (within the meaning of Article 5(1)) was in England. Therefore, the English courts had jurisdiction. Mr Justice Ramsey held: “47 […] it follows from the above analysis that, in my judgment, the place of performance of Pierse Ireland's obligations under the guarantee is in England. That applies, whether, as I have held, the guarantee is governed by English law, or even if this is governed by Irish law. 48 As a result the place of performance of the obligation in question in the guarantee is England and under Article 5(1)(a) of the Jurisdiction Regulation Pierse Ireland domiciled in Ireland, may be sued in England. 49 Accordingly Pierse Ireland's application for a declaration that this court does not have jurisdiction is dismissed” [47-49].