header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 March 2017 / James Watthey
Issue: 7736 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Exclusive jurisdiction: a war on two fronts?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7736_watthey

When is an exclusive jurisdiction clause not an exclusive jurisdiction clause, asks James Watthey

  • Where a bank has executed against security in a foreign jurisdiction under local “self help” remedies, can it also sue in London?

In Bank of Baroda and Bank of India v Nawany Marine Shipping & others [2016] EWHC 3089 (Comm), [2016] All ER (D) 28 (Dec), the Commercial Court determined a jurisdictional battle which revolved around an important point of principle for the international finance community: where a bank has executed against security in a foreign jurisdiction under local “self help” remedies, can it also sue in London?

At least on these facts and with this jurisdiction clause, the answer was in the affirmative.

The jurisdiction clause

The parties entered into a typical suite of loan and guarantee documents in April 2008, for the purpose of financing the purchase of the vessel “DEVIGLORY I”. A facility agreement and personal guarantees contained the sort of jurisdiction clauses, highly favourable to the banks, that finance lawyers are

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll