header-logo header-logo

08 April 2020
Issue: 7882 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 10 & 17 April 2020

Conflict of laws

 

Aspen Underwriting Ltd and others v Credit Europe Bank Nv [2020] UKSC 11, [2020] All ER (D) 08 (Apr)

A jurisdiction agreement in an insurance contract did not bind a third party beneficiary of insurance who was domiciled in a different contracting state and who had not expressly subscribed to the clause. Accordingly, the Supreme Court ruled that the lower courts had not erred in ruling that the English court did not have jurisdiction pursuant to the exclusive English jurisdiction clause contained in the insurance policy concerning a vessel (the policy), in proceedings to recover sums paid by the insurers under a settlement agreement relating to the loss of the vessel, on the basis that it had been deliberately sunk. The court held that the bank, which was domiciled in the Netherlands and which was identified as the mortgagee, assignee and loss payee in the policy, was not a party to the contract (concerning jurisdiction) contained in that policy and that it was not bound by that

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll