Deutsche Bank AG v Comune Di Savona

Deutsche Bank AG v Comune Di Savona

The declarations in issue (7)-(10) and (12) relate to advisory duties and pre-contractual obligations arising from the Convention, which is governed by Italian law and contains an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the Italian courts. The English clause in the ISDA Master Agreement does not extend to these disputes. Deutsche Bank failed to show a good arguable case that the English clause applies to the Italian Claim. Therefore, the English court lacks jurisdiction over these declarations.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Deutsche Bank AG; Defendant/applicant: Comune di Savona
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Stay Application
Outcome
Savona's challenge to jurisdiction in respect of declarations (7)-(10) and (12) succeeds; application for a stay is refused.
Legal Topics
Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses, Negative Declaratory Relief, Derivative Transactions, Interpretation of Contracts, Financial Advisory Duties, Application of Foreign Law
Commercial Law Conflict of Laws Banking and Finance Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses Negative Declaratory Relief Derivative Transactions Interpretation of Contracts Financial Advisory Duties +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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deutsche Bank AG

Claimant/respondent

Comune di Savona

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Stay Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English or Italian exclusive jurisdiction clause governs the dispute regarding advisory duties and negative declarations
  2. 2 Whether the English court has jurisdiction to grant certain negative declarations sought by Deutsche Bank
  3. 3 Whether proceedings should be stayed pending the outcome of related litigation in Italy

Ratio Decidendi

The declarations in issue (7)-(10) and (12) relate to advisory duties and pre-contractual obligations arising from the Convention, which is governed by Italian law and contains an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the Italian courts. The English clause in the ISDA Master Agreement does not extend to these disputes. Deutsche Bank failed to show a good arguable case that the English clause applies to the Italian Claim. Therefore, the English court lacks jurisdiction over these declarations.

Court Disposition

Savona's challenge to jurisdiction in respect of declarations (7)-(10) and (12) succeeds; application for a stay is refused.

Orders

  • Declarations (7)-(10) and (12) struck out for lack of jurisdiction under Article 25 of the Recast Brussels Regulation.
  • Application for a stay of the remaining proceedings pending the outcome of the Prato appeal is refused.