header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 July 2009
Issue: 7378 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

Conflict of laws—Jurisdiction—Challenge to jurisdiction

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA and another v Berliner Verkehersbetriebe (BVG) Anstalt Des Offentlichen Rechts, [2009] EWHC 1627 (Comm), [2009] All ER (D) 88 (Jul)

Queen’s Bench Division, Commercial Court, Teare J, 9 July 2009

When considering jurisdiction under Art 22 of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 (the Brussels Regulation), the court is involved in an exercise of overall classification and the litigation has to be viewed overall and an overall judgment has to be formed whilst taking into account the underlying rationale of Art 22(2).

Laurence Rabinowitz QC and Richard Handyside QC (instructed by Linklaters LLP) for the claimants. Tim Lord QC, Simon Salzedo and Sarah Abram (instructed by Addleshaw Goddard LLP) for the defendant.

The first claimant, JPM, a global provider of banking and financial services, entered into an independent collateral enhancement transaction (the transaction) dated 19 July 2007 with the defendant, a public law institution established under German law. The transaction was intended to provide protection to the defendant against the risks inherent in cross-border leasing arrangements into which it had entered.

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