Messier-Dowty Ltd & Anor v Sabena SA & Ors [1999] EWHC 282 (Comm) (03 December 1999)

Messier-Dowty Ltd & Anor v Sabena SA & Ors [1999] EWHC 282 (Comm) (03 December 1999)

There were no compelling circumstances to justify depriving Dowty of its right to pursue its claim in the agreed English forum. The potential utility of the French Expertise was uncertain and did not outweigh the prejudice and delay to Dowty. The application for a stay was refused.

Citation
[1999] EWHC 282 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Dowty; Defendant: Airbus (Second and Third Defendants); Defendant: Sabena
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay of Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Before Trial
Outcome
Application for stay refused
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Jurisdiction Clauses, Expert Evidence, Brussels Convention, Disclosure Obligations
Civil Procedure Contract Law Private International Law Stay of Proceedings Jurisdiction Clauses Expert Evidence Brussels Convention Disclosure Obligations

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dowty

Claimant

Airbus (Second and Third Defendants)

Defendant

Sabena

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay of Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are compelling circumstances to justify a stay of English proceedings pending the outcome of French expert proceedings (Expertise)
  2. 2 Whether the existence of parallel proceedings and expert investigations in France warrants delaying the English case
  3. 3 Whether the parties' contractual choice of forum should be overridden by procedural developments abroad

Ratio Decidendi

There were no compelling circumstances to justify depriving Dowty of its right to pursue its claim in the agreed English forum. The potential utility of the French Expertise was uncertain and did not outweigh the prejudice and delay to Dowty. The application for a stay was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for stay refused

Orders

  • Application for stay of proceedings pending French Expertise is refused
  • Parties to be heard on appropriate directions for future conduct of proceedings