Roberts v The Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association -Forces Help & Ors

Roberts v The Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association -Forces Help & Ors

Viersen may rely on article 8(2) Brussels Recast Regulation; the English court has jurisdiction over the third party proceedings due to a close connection and risk of irreconcilable judgments; SSAFA and MOD are not bound by the jurisdiction clause as GSTT lacked ostensible authority to bind them.

Parties
Claimant: Master Harry Roberts; Litigation Friend: Mrs Lauren Roberts; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: The Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association – Forces Help; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: The Ministry of Defence; Third Party: Allgemeines Krankenhaus Viersen Gmbh
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Application to Dispute Jurisdiction (third Party Proceedings) / Ruling on Jurisdictional Challenge
Outcome
Application to dispute jurisdiction dismissed; English court has jurisdiction over third party proceedings.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Third Party Proceedings, Agency, Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses, Brussels Recast Regulation
Civil Procedure Contract Law Medical Negligence Private International Law Jurisdiction Third Party Proceedings Agency Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses +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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Master Harry Roberts

Claimant

Mrs Lauren Roberts

Litigation Friend

The Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association – Forces Help

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

The Ministry of Defence

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Allgemeines Krankenhaus Viersen Gmbh

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Application to Dispute Jurisdiction (third Party Proceedings) / Ruling on Jurisdictional Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Viersen can rely on article 8(2) of Brussels Recast Regulation to dispute jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the English court has jurisdiction under article 8(2) of Brussels Recast Regulation
  3. 3 Whether SSAFA and MOD are bound by the jurisdiction clause in the contract dated 29 April 1996 under article 25 of Brussels Recast Regulation

Ratio Decidendi

Viersen may rely on article 8(2) Brussels Recast Regulation; the English court has jurisdiction over the third party proceedings due to a close connection and risk of irreconcilable judgments; SSAFA and MOD are not bound by the jurisdiction clause as GSTT lacked ostensible authority to bind them.

Court Disposition

Application to dispute jurisdiction dismissed; English court has jurisdiction over third party proceedings.

Orders

  • Viersen permitted to rely on article 8(2) Brussels Recast Regulation.
  • English court has jurisdiction to hear third party proceedings against Viersen.