El-Kharouf v El-Kharouf [2004] NSWSC 187

El-Kharouf v El-Kharouf [2004] NSWSC 187

The claims the subject of the application should be permanently stayed because the Jordanian proceeding, commenced and actively pursued by the plaintiff against the same defendants, duplicated a significant part of the NSW claims and the remaining stayed claims were closely intertwined with it; Jordanian law governed the substantive issues; the relevant transactions, parties, business operations, witnesses and evidence were centred in Jordan and Iraq; and continuation in New South Wales would be vexatious or oppressive in the Voth sense, making the Supreme Court of New South Wales a clearly inappropriate forum.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Proceeding; Application for Stay on Forum Non Conveniens Grounds / Application by the First, Second and Third Defendants for a Stay of Proceedings in Relation to Certain Claims in the Further Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Permanent stay of proceedings in relation to the claims in question granted with costs.
Legal Topics
['forum Non Conveniens' 'clearly Inappropriate Forum' 'parallel Proceedings' 'lex Causae' 'jordanian Law' 'joint Venture Agreement' 'promissory Notes' 'guarantees']
['private International Law' 'civil Procedure' 'conflict of Laws' 'contract Law'] ['forum Non Conveniens' 'clearly Inappropriate Forum' 'parallel Proceedings' 'lex Causae' 'jordanian Law' 'joint Venture Agreement' 'promissory Notes' 'guarantees']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Proceeding; Application for Stay on Forum Non Conveniens Grounds / Application by the First, Second and Third Defendants for a Stay of Proceedings in Relation to Certain Claims in the Further Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Supreme Court of New South Wales was a clearly inappropriate forum for the claims concerning the Jordanian joint venture and related promissory notes and guarantees.' 'Whether the existence of actively pursued Jordanian proceedings between the same parties concerning a duplicated and closely connected cause of action made continuation of the NSW claims vexatious or oppressive.' 'Whether the application of Jordanian law, the location of witnesses and evidence, and the Jordanian connection of the transactions justified a permanent stay.']

Ratio Decidendi

The claims the subject of the application should be permanently stayed because the Jordanian proceeding, commenced and actively pursued by the plaintiff against the same defendants, duplicated a significant part of the NSW claims and the remaining stayed claims were closely intertwined with it; Jordanian law governed the substantive issues; the relevant transactions, parties, business operations, witnesses and evidence were centred in Jordan and Iraq; and continuation in New South Wales would be vexatious or oppressive in the Voth sense, making the Supreme Court of New South Wales a clearly inappropriate forum.

Court Disposition

Permanent stay of proceedings in relation to the claims in question granted with costs.

Orders

  • ['The proceedings, so far as they involve the claims the subject of the application for a stay, are permanently stayed on the ground that the Supreme Court of New South Wales is a clearly inappropriate forum for their determination.' 'The first, second and third defendants have their costs of the application.']