PIL instrument(s)

Case number and/or case name

AP Moller-Maersk A/S (t/a Maersk Line) v Sonaec Villas Cen Sad Fadoul & Ors [2010] EWHC 355 (Comm)

Details of the court

England and Wales, First Instance

Articles referred to by the court

Date of the judgement

26 February 2010

Appeal history

CJEU's case law cited by the court

Summary

The claimant was Maersk, a Danish company, which was active throughout the world. The first two defendants were part of the Sonaec group of companies, a Benin holding company. The third defendant, Mr Fadoul, was the owner of the company. The claims were concerned with a delivery of cargo which was carried out from China to Benin, posing inter alia the question whether an exclusive English jurisdiction clause, contained in a Bill of Lading, was to be enforced by the English courts. There was no indication as to when the English proceedings were commenced. However, there were Benin proceedings which had commenced on 5th March 2008. Maersk initiated proceedings in England, seeking a declaration that the English court had exclusive jurisdiction as well as a declaration of non-liability. On 26th February 2010, the English High Court held that it had jurisdiction, enforcing the jurisdiction clause. Sir Christopher Clarke held that: “33 […] in Benincasa v Dentalkit Srl [1997] ECR I-3767 the European Court of Justice held that the courts of a Contracting State which have been designated in a jurisdiction clause validly concluded under the first paragraph of Article 17 of the Convention (the predecessor to Article 23 of the Judgments Regulation) also have exclusive jurisdiction where the action seeks a declaration that the contract containing that clause is void. 34 I do not, therefore, regard myself as lacking in jurisdiction to make the first declaration sought, even if all Maersk’s submissions are entirely correct, and I propose, therefore, to make it. 35 I do not purport to decide anything about the jurisdiction of the court in Benin, which is a question for it. What I do decide is that, in English law, by which the First Bill is expressly governed, the First Bill is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the High Court in England and Wales and any claim under it must be brought here. […] 54 […] Insofar as the claim for a declaration is made in proceedings against Mr Fadoul, I do not consider that the Court has any jurisdiction to make it since he is not party to any jurisdiction agreement. But there is no reason why I should not make a declaration in the form sought as between Maersk and the first two defendants.” [33-35 and 54].