Import Export Metro Ltd. & Anor v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores S.A. [2003] EWHC 11 (Comm) (23 January 2003)

Import Export Metro Ltd. & Anor v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores S.A. [2003] EWHC 11 (Comm) (23 January 2003)

The application to stay or set aside the English proceedings was dismissed because the parties had agreed to a non-exclusive English jurisdiction clause, and no strong reasons were shown to depart from that bargain. The factors raised by CSAV were matters of convenience, foreseeable at the time of contract, and did not engage the interests of justice so as to override the jurisdiction clause.

Citation
[2003] EWHC 11 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Import Export Metro Ltd; Claimant/respondent: Metro Exports; Defendant/applicant: Compania Sud Americana De Vapores S. A.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2003
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application (jurisdiction/stay) / Application to Set Aside Service And/or Stay Proceedings
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction Clauses, Forum Non Conveniens, Bills of Lading, Choice of Law, Stay of Proceedings
Commercial Law Private International Law Shipping Law Jurisdiction Clauses Forum Non Conveniens Bills of Lading Choice of Law Stay of Proceedings

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Import Export Metro Ltd

Claimant/respondent

Metro Exports

Claimant/respondent

Compania Sud Americana De Vapores S. A.

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application (jurisdiction/stay) / Application to Set Aside Service And/or Stay Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court should exercise jurisdiction under a non-exclusive English jurisdiction clause in bills of lading
  2. 2 Whether proceedings should be stayed in favour of Chilean arbitration/forum
  3. 3 Whether there are strong reasons to depart from the jurisdiction clause

Ratio Decidendi

The application to stay or set aside the English proceedings was dismissed because the parties had agreed to a non-exclusive English jurisdiction clause, and no strong reasons were shown to depart from that bargain. The factors raised by CSAV were matters of convenience, foreseeable at the time of contract, and did not engage the interests of justice so as to override the jurisdiction clause.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • CSAV's application to set aside service and/or stay proceedings is dismissed.