Med Marine v Castillo Schiffahrts-Gmbh & Co. KG MS & Anor
On the true construction of the Booking Note, the English jurisdiction clause applies to all disputes except claims for unpaid fees, which may be brought in Istanbul. The Istanbul clause is not exclusive and does not override the English jurisdiction clause. The claimant has much the better argument on jurisdiction. Service on the second defendant was not defective as the second defendant acknowledged service before being served, waiving the need for service. England is the appropriate forum for the dispute.
- Parties
- Claimant: Med Marine; First Defendant: Castillo Schiffahrts-GmbH & Co. KG MS; Second Defendant: Conti Cartagena Shipping Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 28 March 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Jurisdictional Challenge
- Outcome
- Defendants' application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses, Interpretation of Contracts
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Med Marine
Claimant
Castillo Schiffahrts-GmbH & Co. KG MS
First Defendant
Conti Cartagena Shipping Ltd
Second Defendant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Jurisdictional Challenge
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction under the Booking Note incorporating UK Standard Conditions for Towage and Other Services (Revised 1986)
- 2 Whether the Istanbul jurisdiction clause in the Booking Note is exclusive or limited to certain disputes
- 3 Whether service out of the jurisdiction on the second defendant was valid or required permission
Ratio Decidendi
On the true construction of the Booking Note, the English jurisdiction clause applies to all disputes except claims for unpaid fees, which may be brought in Istanbul. The Istanbul clause is not exclusive and does not override the English jurisdiction clause. The claimant has much the better argument on jurisdiction. Service on the second defendant was not defective as the second defendant acknowledged service before being served, waiving the need for service. England is the appropriate forum for the dispute.
Court Disposition
Defendants' application dismissed
Orders
- Defendants' application contesting jurisdiction is dismissed
- Court will hear submissions on costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment