Underwriting Members of Lloyd's Syndicate 980 & Ors v Sinco SA

Underwriting Members of Lloyd's Syndicate 980 & Ors v Sinco SA

The English and Greek proceedings do not have the same cause and object for Article 27 purposes; the English claim is for damages for breach of contract (jurisdiction clause), while the Greek proceedings are based on tort and statute. Therefore, Article 27 does not require a stay of the English proceedings. The English court was not first seised of the jurisdiction clause claim under Article 30, but this does not alter the outcome.

Parties
Claimants: The Underwriting Members of Lloyd’s Syndicate 980 for the 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 Underwriting Years of Account as managed by Limit Underwriting Limited and Others; Defendant: Sinco S.A.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application (stay of Proceedings) / Ruling on Application for Stay Pending Foreign Proceedings
Outcome
Application for stay dismissed
Legal Topics
Lis Pendens, Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses, Council Regulation (ec) 44/2001, Stay of Proceedings, Forum Selection, Jurisdictional Disputes
Civil Procedure Private International Law Contract Law Lis Pendens Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses Council Regulation (ec) 44/2001 Stay of Proceedings Forum Selection +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 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Underwriting Members of Lloyd’s Syndicate 980 for the 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 Underwriting Years of Account as managed by Limit Underwriting Limited and Others

Claimants

Sinco S.A.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application (stay of Proceedings) / Ruling on Application for Stay Pending Foreign Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court should stay the jurisdiction clause claim under Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 pending the Greek court's determination of its jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the English court was first seised of the jurisdiction clause claim under Article 30 of the Regulation
  3. 3 Whether the cause and object of the English and Greek proceedings are the same for the purposes of Article 27

Ratio Decidendi

The English and Greek proceedings do not have the same cause and object for Article 27 purposes; the English claim is for damages for breach of contract (jurisdiction clause), while the Greek proceedings are based on tort and statute. Therefore, Article 27 does not require a stay of the English proceedings. The English court was not first seised of the jurisdiction clause claim under Article 30, but this does not alter the outcome.

Court Disposition

Application for stay dismissed

Orders

  • Application for stay of the jurisdiction clause claim under Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 is dismissed.