Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/30370
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorAhmed, Mukarrumen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBeaumont, Paulen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-30T01:02:09Z-
dc.date.available2019-10-30T01:02:09Z-
dc.date.issued2017en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/30370-
dc.description.abstractThis article contends that the system of “qualified” or “partial” mutual trust in the Hague Choice of Court Agreements Convention (“Hague Convention”) may permit anti-suit injunctions, actions for damages for breach of exclusive jurisdiction agreements and anti-enforcement injunctions where such remedies further the objective of the Convention. However, intra-EU Hague Convention cases may arguably23 not permit remedies for breach of exclusive jurisdiction agreements as they may infringe the principles of mutual trust and effectiveness of EU law (effet utile) underlying the Brussels I Recast Regulation. The relationship between Article 31(2) of the Brussels I Recast Regulation and Articles 5 and 6 of the Hague Convention is mapped in this article. It will be argued that the Hartley–Dogauchi Report’s interpretative approach has much to commend it as it follows the path of least resistance by narrowly construing the right to sue in a non-chosen forum as an exception rather than the norm. This exceptional nature of the right to sue in the non-chosen forum under the Hague Convention can be effectively reconciled with the Brussels I Recast Regulation’s reverse lis pendens rule under Article 31(2). This will usually result in the stay of the proceedings in the non-chosen court as soon as the chosen court is seised. The impact of Brexit on this area of the law is uncertain but it has been argued that the likely outcome post-Brexit is that the regime applicable between the UK and the EU (apart from Denmark) in relation to exclusive jurisdiction agreements within the scope of the Hague Convention will be the Hague Convention.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis (Routledge)en_UK
dc.relationAhmed M & Beaumont P (2017) Exclusive choice of court agreements: some issues on the Hague Convention on choice of court agreements and its relationship with the Brussels I recast especially anti-suit injunctions, concurrent proceedings and the implications of BREXIT. Journal of Private International Law, 13 (2), pp. 386-410. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441048.2017.1348782en_UK
dc.rightsThis is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in Journal of Private International Law on 23 Aug 2017, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/17441048.2017.1348782.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttps://storre.stir.ac.uk/STORREEndUserLicence.pdfen_UK
dc.subjectprivate international lawen_UK
dc.subjectconflict of lawsen_UK
dc.subjectinternational commercial litigationen_UK
dc.subjectHague Convention on Choice of Court Agreementsen_UK
dc.subjectBrussels I Recast Regulationen_UK
dc.subjectexclusive jurisdiction agreementsen_UK
dc.subjectchoice of court clausesen_UK
dc.subjectanti-suit injunctionsen_UK
dc.subjectparallel proceedingsen_UK
dc.subjectlis pendensen_UK
dc.subjectBrexiten_UK
dc.subjectdisconnection clausesen_UK
dc.subjecttreaty interpretationen_UK
dc.subjectEU law interpretationen_UK
dc.titleExclusive choice of court agreements: some issues on the Hague Convention on choice of court agreements and its relationship with the Brussels I recast especially anti-suit injunctions, concurrent proceedings and the implications of BREXITen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/17441048.2017.1348782en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleJournal of Private International Lawen_UK
dc.citation.issn1757-8418en_UK
dc.citation.issn1744-1048en_UK
dc.citation.volume13en_UK
dc.citation.issue2en_UK
dc.citation.spage386en_UK
dc.citation.epage410en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusAM - Accepted Manuscripten_UK
dc.contributor.funderUniversity of Aberdeenen_UK
dc.citation.date23/08/2017en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationLancaster Universityen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Aberdeenen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000411574600006en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85030129151en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1472138en_UK
dc.date.accepted2017-03-30en_UK
dc.description.refREF Compliant by Deposit in other institution's Repository: Lancaster's repository on 30/03/2017: https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/85738en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2019-10-29en_UK
Appears in Collections:Law and Philosophy Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Exclusive_choice_of_court_agreements_som.pdfFulltext - Accepted Version356.6 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.