Citi-March Ltd v Neptune Orient Lines Ltd (Humber Bridge)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 1996 |
| Date | 1996 |
| Year | 1996 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
40 cases
-
Golden Shore Transportation Pte Ltd v UCO Bank and Another Appeal
...clause are different from those applicable to determining forum non conveniens: see Citi-March Ltd v Neptune Orient Lines Ltd [1997] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 72 at 76 per Colman J. As this Court noted in The Vishva Apurva [1992] 2 SLR 175 at “In a case involving an exclusive jurisdiction clause, the d......
-
Donohue v. Armco Inc. et al., (2001) 294 N.R. 356 (HL)
...[para. 27]. Taunton-Collins v. Cromie, [1964] 1 W.L.R. 633 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27]. Citi-March Ltd. v. Neptune Orient Lines Ltd., [1996] 1 W.L.R. 1367, refd to. [para. Mahavir Minerals Ltd. v. Cho Yang Shipping Co.; Ship M C Pearl, Re, [1997] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 566, refd to. [para. 27]. Bou......
-
Akai Pty. Ltd v People's Insurance Company Ltd
...Cotton Oil Co v Granadex SAUNK [1976] 2 Ll Rep 10. Chaparral, TheUNK [1968] 2 Ll Rep 158. Citi-March Ltd v Neptune Orient Lines LtdWLR [1996] 1 WLR 1367. Detker v VIO Sovracht (unreported, 16 December 1987, Phillips J). Du Pont (EI) de Nemours & Co v AgnewUNK [1987] 2 Ll Rep 585. Eastern Tr......
-
Import Export Metro Ltd v Cia Sud Americana de Vapores SA
...jurisdiction clause; factor (1), albeit not alone, was decisive. Likewise, considerations of this nature determined the outcome in Citi-March v Neptune Orient [1996] 1 WLR 1367. (II) APPLICATION OF THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES 19 Overview : I turn to the application of the relevant principles. A......
Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
-
ENFORCING ENGLISH JURISDICTION CLAUSES IN BILLS OF LADING
...court refuses to enforce a foreign jurisdiction agreement because of multiple proceedings see Citi-March Ltd v Neptune Orient Lines Ltd[1996] 2 All ER 545; [1997] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 72; The MC Pearl[1997] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 566; and obiter, Konkola Copper Mines Plc v Coromin Ltd[2006] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 4......
-
NO DISPUTE AMOUNTING TO STRONG CAUSE; STRONG CAUSE FOR DISPUTE?
...and trial allowed to proceed notwithstanding the jurisdiction clause. See The El Amria[1981] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 119; Citi-Murch v Neptune[1996] 1 WLR 1367. Peel, supra, at 222, observes that the problems posed by multiplicity of proceedings have proved to be the most reliable basis upon which to......