Sylvie Klifa v Simon Slater & Anor

Sylvie Klifa v Simon Slater & Anor

The defendants failed to show that France is clearly or distinctly the more appropriate forum. Even if it were, special circumstances and legitimate juridical advantages—including substantial costs incurred under English procedure, the ease of enforcement in England, and the case's procedural history—require the claim to proceed in England to achieve the ends of justice. The application for a stay is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Sylvie Klifa; First Defendant: Simon Slater; Second Defendant: Insure and Go Insurance Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury (quantum Only) / Application to Stay Proceedings on Forum Non Conveniens Grounds
Outcome
Application for stay dismissed
Legal Topics
Forum Non Conveniens, Jurisdiction, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Brexit Transitional Arrangements, Assessment of Damages Under Foreign Law
Private International Law Civil Procedure Personal Injury Forum Non Conveniens Jurisdiction Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Brexit Transitional Arrangements Assessment of Damages Under Foreign Law

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sylvie Klifa

Claimant

Simon Slater

First Defendant

Insure and Go Insurance Services Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury (quantum Only) / Application to Stay Proceedings on Forum Non Conveniens Grounds

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court should stay proceedings on the ground of forum non conveniens in favour of France after Brexit transitional arrangements ceased to apply
  2. 2 Whether France is clearly or distinctly the more appropriate forum for the trial of the action
  3. 3 Whether special circumstances or legitimate juridical advantage require the claim to proceed in England despite France being more appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants failed to show that France is clearly or distinctly the more appropriate forum. Even if it were, special circumstances and legitimate juridical advantages—including substantial costs incurred under English procedure, the ease of enforcement in England, and the case's procedural history—require the claim to proceed in England to achieve the ends of justice. The application for a stay is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for stay dismissed

Orders

  • Application for a stay on forum non conveniens grounds is dismissed
  • Questions of permission to appeal, time to appeal, form of orders, and costs adjourned for further submissions