This Commercial Court decision of 9 October 2015 makes it clear that attempts to circumvent exclusive jurisdiction agreements in favour of the English courts by bringing related actions in other EU member states are unlikely to succeed. It also demonstrates the court’s willingness to award damages for breach of a jurisdiction clause.
Thus, although the defendant Italian pension fund (ENPAM) had brought antecedent claims in Italy against the claimant bank (Barclays), Blair J declined to stay the English proceedings under either article 27 or 28 of Regulation 44/2001 (Brussels I). Blair J also gave summary judgment to Barclays on most of its claim for damages for breach of the exclusive jurisdiction clause. Continue reading