header-logo header-logo

04 April 2025 / Richard Marshall , Harriet Campbell
Issue: 8111 / Categories: Features , Jurisdiction , Contract , EU
printer mail-detail

Asymmetric clauses: a balancing act?

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

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll