Arbitration and the Brussels Convention: antisuit injunctions
Series: Arbitration Law Monthly ; 1(2) March 2001, 3-7(5)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: Where an arbitration clause has cited England as the seat of an arbitration, the English courts will issue an injunction to prevent parties starting judicial proceedings in another jurisdiction. Looks at the question of whether judicial discretion should be exercised in favour of the grant of an injunction, especially where the person to be injuncted resides in the EC. In this situation, jurisdiction depends on the Brussels Convention 1968. Under article 2 of the Convention, a defendant can only be sued in the contracting state where he resides. Looks at the recent case "Navigation Maritime Bulgare v Rustal Trading Ltd", heard in the English courts, which involved an application for an antisuit injunction, and throws some light on the impact on English arbitration proceedings of the Brussels Convention.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS63685 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 111936-1001 |
Where an arbitration clause has cited England as the seat of an arbitration, the English courts will issue an injunction to prevent parties starting judicial proceedings in another jurisdiction. Looks at the question of whether judicial discretion should be exercised in favour of the grant of an injunction, especially where the person to be injuncted resides in the EC. In this situation, jurisdiction depends on the Brussels Convention 1968. Under article 2 of the Convention, a defendant can only be sued in the contracting state where he resides. Looks at the recent case "Navigation Maritime Bulgare v Rustal Trading Ltd", heard in the English courts, which involved an application for an antisuit injunction, and throws some light on the impact on English arbitration proceedings of the Brussels Convention.