E D & F Man Capital Markets Ltd v Straits (Singapore) PTE Ltd

E D & F Man Capital Markets Ltd v Straits (Singapore) PTE Ltd

England is the proper place to bring the claim against Straits because the exclusive jurisdiction clauses require proceedings against anchor defendants in England, the risk of multiplicity and irreconcilable judgments is significant, and MCM did not irrevocably elect to pursue Straits in Singapore. The necessary or proper party gateway is satisfied and MCM's conduct does not preclude jurisdiction.

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 Judgment on Jurisdiction Challenge
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Forum Conveniens, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Multiplicity of Proceedings, Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Jurisdiction Forum Conveniens Service Out of Jurisdiction Multiplicity of Proceedings Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses

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 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 Judgment on Jurisdiction Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether England is the proper place to bring the claim against Straits under forum conveniens principles
  2. 2 Whether the risk of irreconcilable judgments and multiplicity of proceedings is decisive in favour of English jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether MCM's conduct in Singapore precludes it from pursuing Straits in England

Ratio Decidendi

England is the proper place to bring the claim against Straits because the exclusive jurisdiction clauses require proceedings against anchor defendants in England, the risk of multiplicity and irreconcilable judgments is significant, and MCM did not irrevocably elect to pursue Straits in Singapore. The necessary or proper party gateway is satisfied and MCM's conduct does not preclude jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

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