Jurisdiction and conflicts of law

(i) Jurisdiction – which court has jurisdiction?

a. Each court will apply its own choice of law rules. Therefore the issue of which court
has jurisdiction is impt.
b. Usually go for def’s domicile, place of residence – section 1
i. Why defendant? Plt chooses the grounds of attack and the def has to def. So
to restore the balance somewhat, the def can defend at home – idea is to
provide a level playing field a much as possible. Romantic idea of a neutral
forum.
c. Things get diff when we talk about special jurisdiction in section 2.
i. Sue in the place where the contract is to be performed as evidence there,
witnesses there.
ii. Art 2:201 last sentence –
d. Section 3 – prorogation of jurisdiction
i. Std rule – parties do indeed have the freedom to choose
ii. Partial jurisdiction is a possibility
iii. No requirement that there be a logical link for choosing a particular court.
iv. Is jurisdiction exclusive or non exclusive? If you don’t say, its non exclusive.
All we want is to give the parties an additional opportunity.
v. Rather than insist that it be exclusive we make it a presumption.
vi. There is no logic to art 2301 para 3 – its just that the we need to choose a
court first.
e. Section 4 – Exclusive jurisdiction
i. GAT v LUK
1. As soon as the def raises validity def, cannot escape exclusive
jurisdiction, have to abandon the case or at least stay the
proceedings until the issue of validity is decided, national courts
have to decide on the issue of validity.
2. Torremans think this decision is bad – undesirable to have many
national courts deciding just because of the validity issue.
3. If you don;t bring your validity claim within X months, we accept
that you drop the validity point.
(ii) Choice of law
a. each court will apply its own connecting factors e.g. where the harm occurs, etc.
(iii) Recognition/ enforcement of judgments
a.