UBS AG, London Branch & Anor v Kommunale Wasserwerke Leipzig GmbH [2010] EWHC 2566 (Comm) (15 October 2010)

UBS AG, London Branch & Anor v Kommunale Wasserwerke Leipzig GmbH [2010] EWHC 2566 (Comm) (15 October 2010)

The court held that the English proceedings are not principally concerned with the validity of decisions of KWL's organs within the meaning of Article 22.2 of the Brussels Regulation. The issues of validity are only one aspect of a broader dispute involving contractual, factual, and performance issues under English law-governed agreements. Therefore, Article 22.2 does not confer exclusive jurisdiction on the German courts, and the English court has jurisdiction under the parties' contractual choice of forum.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 2566 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: UBS AG, London Branch; Claimant/respondent: UBS Global Asset Management (UK) Limited; Defendant/applicant: Kommunale Wasserwerke Leipzig GmbH (KWL)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application (jurisdiction Challenge) / Interlocutory Application for Declaration on Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction Under Brussels Regulation, Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses, Ultra Vires and Corporate Capacity, Validity of Company Decisions, Credit Default Swaps, Conflict of Laws
Private International Law Commercial Law Banking and Finance Jurisdiction Under Brussels Regulation Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses Ultra Vires and Corporate Capacity Validity of Company Decisions Credit Default Swaps +1 more

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

UBS AG, London Branch

Claimant/respondent

UBS Global Asset Management (UK) Limited

Claimant/respondent

Kommunale Wasserwerke Leipzig GmbH (KWL)

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application (jurisdiction Challenge) / Interlocutory Application for Declaration on Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction over the proceedings under Article 23 of the Brussels Regulation
  2. 2 Whether the German court has exclusive jurisdiction under Article 22.2 of the Brussels Regulation due to issues of validity of company decisions
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings are principally concerned with the validity of decisions of KWL's organs

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the English proceedings are not principally concerned with the validity of decisions of KWL's organs within the meaning of Article 22.2 of the Brussels Regulation. The issues of validity are only one aspect of a broader dispute involving contractual, factual, and performance issues under English law-governed agreements. Therefore, Article 22.2 does not confer exclusive jurisdiction on the German courts, and the English court has jurisdiction under the parties' contractual choice of forum.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application by KWL for a declaration that the English court has no jurisdiction is dismissed.
  • The English court will proceed to hear the substantive claims.