Scottish & Newcastle International Ltd v Othon Ghalanos Ltd

Scottish & Newcastle International Ltd v Othon Ghalanos Ltd

The Court held that, under English law and the terms of the contract, delivery occurred at the port of shipment (Liverpool) and not at Limassol. The references to Limassol as 'place of delivery' in invoices did not override the contractual delivery point. Therefore, the English courts have jurisdiction under Article 5.1(b) of the Regulation, as the place of delivery is England.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Scottish & Newcastle International Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Othon Ghalanos Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (commercial) / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division (commercial Court) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction Under Brussels Regulation, International Sale of Goods, Interpretation of Delivery Terms (cfr/c&f/cif), Contractual Obligations, Passing of Risk and Title
International Commercial Law Conflict of Laws Civil Procedure Jurisdiction Under Brussels Regulation International Sale of Goods Interpretation of Delivery Terms (cfr/c&f/cif) Contractual Obligations Passing of Risk and Title

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scottish & Newcastle International Ltd

Claimant/respondent

Othon Ghalanos Ltd

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (commercial) / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division (commercial Court) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English courts have jurisdiction under Article 5.1(b) of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 for a claim for the price of goods sold CFR Limassol
  2. 2 Whether the contract expressly or impliedly provided for delivery in Limassol or at the port of shipment
  3. 3 How 'place of delivery' is to be determined under English law for international sales contracts

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that, under English law and the terms of the contract, delivery occurred at the port of shipment (Liverpool) and not at Limassol. The references to Limassol as 'place of delivery' in invoices did not override the contractual delivery point. Therefore, the English courts have jurisdiction under Article 5.1(b) of the Regulation, as the place of delivery is England.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Jurisdiction confirmed for the English courts under Article 5.1(b) of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001
  • No express or implied term for delivery in Limassol found