Ebury Partners Belgium SA/NV v Technical Touch BV & Anor [2022] EWHC 2927 (Comm) (18 November 2022)

Ebury Partners Belgium SA/NV v Technical Touch BV & Anor [2022] EWHC 2927 (Comm) (18 November 2022)

Ebury established, to a high degree of probability, that the English jurisdiction clause was incorporated into the contract with TT under English law by virtue of clear notice and express assent via the online application process. There were no strong reasons to refuse anti-suit relief. The court granted an anti-suit injunction restraining the Defendants from pursuing the Belgian proceedings in breach of the exclusive jurisdiction agreement.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2927 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: EBURY PARTNERS BELGIUM SA/NV; First Defendant: TECHNICAL TOUCH BV; Second Defendant: JAN BERTHELS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim / Interim Application for Anti Suit Injunction and Jurisdictional Challenge
Outcome
Anti-suit injunction granted; Defendants' jurisdictional challenge dismissed
Legal Topics
Anti Suit Injunctions, Jurisdiction Clauses, Incorporation of Terms, Rome I Regulation, Choice of Law, Enforcement of Exclusive Jurisdiction Agreements
Contract Law Private International Law Civil Procedure Anti Suit Injunctions Jurisdiction Clauses Incorporation of Terms Rome I Regulation Choice of Law +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

EBURY PARTNERS BELGIUM SA/NV

Claimant

TECHNICAL TOUCH BV

First Defendant

JAN BERTHELS

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim / Interim Application for Anti Suit Injunction and Jurisdictional Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English jurisdiction clause in Ebury's standard terms was incorporated into the contract with TT under English law and/or Belgian law
  2. 2 Whether the court should grant an anti-suit injunction restraining Belgian proceedings in breach of the exclusive jurisdiction agreement
  3. 3 Whether there are strong reasons to refuse anti-suit relief or decline jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

Ebury established, to a high degree of probability, that the English jurisdiction clause was incorporated into the contract with TT under English law by virtue of clear notice and express assent via the online application process. There were no strong reasons to refuse anti-suit relief. The court granted an anti-suit injunction restraining the Defendants from pursuing the Belgian proceedings in breach of the exclusive jurisdiction agreement.

Court Disposition

Anti-suit injunction granted; Defendants' jurisdictional challenge dismissed

Orders

  • Defendants restrained from continuing Belgian proceedings in breach of the exclusive English jurisdiction agreement
  • Defendants' application challenging jurisdiction of the English court dismissed