Heifer International Inc v Helge Christiansen & Ors

Heifer International Inc v Helge Christiansen & Ors

The court found that the contracts between the Claimant and the Second to Fifth Defendants contained arbitration clauses incorporated in writing, and that these clauses were not unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, given the Claimant's use of independent Danish legal advice and the context of the agreements. The arbitration clauses are therefore binding and confer exclusive jurisdiction on the Danish Arbitration Board. The English court proceedings are stayed in favour of arbitration in Denmark.

Parties
Claimant: Heifer International Inc; First Defendant: Helge Christiansen; Second Defendant: Christiansen Arkitekter KS MAA PAR; Third Defendant: Haslev-Hansen VVS; Fourth Defendant: Stevns El-Service A/S; Fifth Defendant: Listed El-Teknik ApS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Application (stay of Proceedings/jurisdiction) / Judgment on Application to Stay Proceedings and Contest Jurisdiction
Outcome
Proceedings stayed in favour of arbitration in Denmark; relief granted to Second to Fifth Defendants.
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Jurisdiction Clauses, Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts, Incorporation of Arbitration Clauses, Brussels Convention, Separability of Arbitration Agreements
Arbitration Civil Procedure Conflict of Laws Consumer Protection Stay of Proceedings Jurisdiction Clauses Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Incorporation of Arbitration Clauses +2 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 6 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Heifer International Inc

Claimant

Helge Christiansen

First Defendant

Christiansen Arkitekter KS MAA PAR

Second Defendant

Haslev-Hansen VVS

Third Defendant

Stevns El-Service A/S

Fourth Defendant

Listed El-Teknik ApS

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application (stay of Proceedings/jurisdiction) / Judgment on Application to Stay Proceedings and Contest Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration clauses in the contracts between the Claimant and the Danish Defendants are incorporated and binding under the Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration clauses are unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999
  3. 3 Whether the English court has jurisdiction under the Brussels Convention or whether the Danish Arbitration Board has exclusive jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the contracts between the Claimant and the Second to Fifth Defendants contained arbitration clauses incorporated in writing, and that these clauses were not unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, given the Claimant's use of independent Danish legal advice and the context of the agreements. The arbitration clauses are therefore binding and confer exclusive jurisdiction on the Danish Arbitration Board. The English court proceedings are stayed in favour of arbitration in Denmark.

Court Disposition

Proceedings stayed in favour of arbitration in Denmark; relief granted to Second to Fifth Defendants.

Orders

  • Stay of proceedings against Second to Fifth Defendants under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
  • Declaration that disputes are to be resolved by the Danish Arbitration Board in Copenhagen.