E D & F Man Capital Markets Ltd v Straits (Singapore) PTE Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2073 (26 November 2019)

E D & F Man Capital Markets Ltd v Straits (Singapore) PTE Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2073 (26 November 2019)

England is the proper place to bring the claim against Straits because the exclusive jurisdiction clauses required the anchor defendants to be sued in England, there was no substantive proceeding against Straits in Singapore, and the avoidance of multiplicity of proceedings and risk of irreconcilable judgments...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] EWCA Civ 2073
Parties
Claimant (respondent): E D & F Man Capital Markets Ltd; Tenth Defendant (appellant): Straits (Singapore) Pte Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Forum Conveniens, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Multiparty Litigation, Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses, Pre Action Disclosure, Anti Suit Injunctions
Civil Procedure Private International Law Commercial Law Jurisdiction Forum Conveniens Service Out of Jurisdiction Multiparty Litigation Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E D & F Man Capital Markets Ltd

Claimant (respondent)

Straits (Singapore) Pte Limited

Tenth Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether England is the proper place to bring the claim against Straits under the forum conveniens test
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's prior conduct in Singapore precludes it from pursuing proceedings in England
  3. 3 Whether the use of material disclosed in Singapore proceedings invalidates the English proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

England is the proper place to bring the claim against Straits because the exclusive jurisdiction clauses required the anchor defendants to be sued in England, there was no substantive proceeding against Straits in Singapore, and the avoidance of multiplicity of proceedings and risk of irreconcilable judgments strongly favours a single composite forum in England. The claimant's prior conduct in Singapore did not amount to an irrevocable election or preclude proceedings in England. The use of Singapore material was inadvertent and remedied, and did not justify refusing permission to serve out.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to serve out of the jurisdiction upheld
  • Costs order against Straits for adjournment application remains