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

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
back-to-top-scroll