header-logo header-logo

Asymmetric clauses: a balancing act?

04 April 2025 / Richard Marshall , Harriet Campbell
Issue: 8111 / Categories: Features , Jurisdiction , Contract , EU
printer mail-detail
Much favoured in finance contracts, asymmetric clauses have been confirmed as valid under EU law: Richard Marshall & Harriet Campbell consider the impact for contracting parties
  • The Court of Justice of the European Union has confirmed that asymmetric jurisdiction clauses favouring EU or Lugano courts are valid and enforceable under EU law.
  • Clauses providing for the possible jurisdiction of the English courts may be interpreted as unenforceable.

In a pivotal judgment on jurisdiction, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled that asymmetric clauses are valid and enforceable under EU law. While this resolves doubts about their validity within the EU, the risk of unenforceability remains if the clause designates courts outside of the EU or Lugano Convention countries (namely, the EU, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland).

Asymmetric clauses are much favoured in finance contracts. Typically, they allow the lender to sue in any jurisdiction but restrict the borrower to one jurisdiction. However, the downside of such clauses, until now, has been the risk

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Set creates new client and business development role amid growth

Kingsley Napley—Tim Lowles

Kingsley Napley—Tim Lowles

Sports disputes practice launchedwith partner appointment

mfg Solicitors—Tom Evans

mfg Solicitors—Tom Evans

Tax and succession planning offering expands with returning partner

NEWS
The rank of King’s Counsel (KC) has been awarded to 96 barristers, and no solicitors, in the latest silk round
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first
In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss
Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved
back-to-top-scroll