Shannon v Global Tunneling Experts UK Ltd & Ors [2015] EWHC 1267 (QB) (07 May 2015)

Shannon v Global Tunneling Experts UK Ltd & Ors [2015] EWHC 1267 (QB) (07 May 2015)

The English court has jurisdiction over the Belgian Defendants under Article 6(1) of the Brussels Regulation because there is a risk of irreconcilable judgments arising from separate proceedings, and the claims against the Belgian Defendants are not matters relating to an individual contract of employment within the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1267
Parties
Claimant: Ian Shannon; First Defendant: Global Tunneling Experts UK Limited; Second Defendant: TBM Assistance SARL; Third Defendant: THV Locobouw; Fourth Defendant: Aannemingsmaatschappij CFE NVE; Fifth Defendant: CEI-De Meyer NV; Sixth Defendant: Vinci Construction Grands Projects S.A.S; Seventh Defendant: Wayss & Freytag Ingenieubau AG
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Claim (jurisdictional Challenge) / Application to Contest Jurisdiction (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction Under Brussels Regulation, Personal Injury at Work, Employment Relationship, Tortious Liability, Vicarious Liability, Abuse of Process
Private International Law Employment Law Tort Law Jurisdiction Under Brussels Regulation Personal Injury at Work Employment Relationship Tortious Liability Vicarious Liability +1 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 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ian Shannon

Claimant

Global Tunneling Experts UK Limited

First Defendant

TBM Assistance SARL

Second Defendant

THV Locobouw

Third Defendant

Aannemingsmaatschappij CFE NVE

Fourth Defendant

CEI-De Meyer NV

Fifth Defendant

Vinci Construction Grands Projects S.A.S

Sixth Defendant

Wayss & Freytag Ingenieubau AG

Seventh Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Claim (jurisdictional Challenge) / Application to Contest Jurisdiction (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction over Belgian defendants under Article 6(1) of the Brussels Regulation
  2. 2 Whether the claim relates to an individual contract of employment under Articles 18-20 of the Brussels Regulation
  3. 3 Whether there is a risk of irreconcilable judgments justifying jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The English court has jurisdiction over the Belgian Defendants under Article 6(1) of the Brussels Regulation because there is a risk of irreconcilable judgments arising from separate proceedings, and the claims against the Belgian Defendants are not matters relating to an individual contract of employment within the meaning of Articles 18-20, as no such contract exists between the Claimant and the Belgian Defendants.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The Belgian Defendants' application for a declaration that the court lacks jurisdiction is dismissed.
  • It will not be open to the Claimant at trial to amend his case to argue that the 1996 Act applies because an implied contract existed with the Belgian Defendants.