header-logo header-logo

Conflict of laws

24 November 2011
Issue: 7491 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Seven Licensing Company Sarl and another company v FFG-Platinum SA and other companies [2011] EWHC 2967 (Comm), [2011] All ER (D) 125 (Nov)

It was established law that actions were related if they involved the risk of conflicting decisions, without necessarily involving the risk of giving rise to mutually exclusive legal consequences. There were three factors which might be relevant to the exercise of the discretion; first, the extent of the relatedness and the risk of mutually irreconcilable decisions; second, the stage reached in each set of proceedings; and third the proximity of the courts to the subject matter of the case. The closer the connection between the proceedings in question, the more necessary it would appear for the court second seised to stay its proceedings.
 

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll