Crucial Music Corporation & Anor v Klondyke Management AG & Ors [2007] EWHC 1782 (Ch) (25 July 2007)
There is a good arguable case that the place of performance of the warranties was London, where the transfer of the assets was effected. For the tort claim, the loss from misrepresentation occurred in London when the claimants entered into the Agreement and paid the purchase price. The Master did not misdirect himself and was correct to dismiss the application to set aside service out of jurisdiction.
- Citation
- [2007] EWHC 1782 (Ch)
- Parties
- Claimant/respondent: Crucial Music Corporation (formerly known as Onemusic Corporation); Claimant/respondent: Point Classics LLC; Defendant/appellant: Premstroy Enterprises Limited; Defendant/appellant: Klondyke Management AG (formerly known as Point Classics AG); Defendant/appellant: Klondyke Verwaltungs und Beteiligungsgesellschaft AG; Defendant/appellant: Wilhelm Mittrich; Defendant/appellant: ODS Optical Disc Service GmbH
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 25 July 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Appeal From Order Dismissing Application to Set Aside Service Out of Jurisdiction
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction Under Lugano Convention, Jurisdiction Under Judgments Regulation, Breach of Contract, Misrepresentation, Service Out of Jurisdiction
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Crucial Music Corporation (formerly known as Onemusic Corporation)
Claimant/respondent
Point Classics LLC
Claimant/respondent
Premstroy Enterprises Limited
Defendant/appellant
Klondyke Management AG (formerly known as Point Classics AG)
Defendant/appellant
Klondyke Verwaltungs und Beteiligungsgesellschaft AG
Defendant/appellant
Wilhelm Mittrich
Defendant/appellant
ODS Optical Disc Service GmbH
Defendant/appellant
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Order Dismissing Application to Set Aside Service Out of Jurisdiction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a warranty given by a third party to a purchaser of intellectual property rights as to the nature of those rights can be an obligation with a place of performance within Article 5(1) of the Lugano Convention and Judgments Regulation
- 2 Whether the place where damage was sustained as a result of misrepresentation is the place where the contract induced by the misrepresentation was executed and/or completed under Article 5(3) of the Conventions
Ratio Decidendi
There is a good arguable case that the place of performance of the warranties was London, where the transfer of the assets was effected. For the tort claim, the loss from misrepresentation occurred in London when the claimants entered into the Agreement and paid the purchase price. The Master did not misdirect himself and was correct to dismiss the application to set aside service out of jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Defendants' appeal dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment