Evialis S.A. v S.I.A.T. and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court) |
| Judge | Andrew Smith J |
| Judgment Date | 16 April 2003 |
| Neutral Citation | [2003] EWHC 863 (Comm) |
| Date | 16 April 2003 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
22 cases
-
"The Alexandros T" and Others
...whether they have the same cause and the same object. In so far as Andrew Smith J treated the question as a broader one in Evialis SA v SIAT [2003] 2 Lloyd's Rep 377 I respectfully disagree with him, although, as Beatson J observed in Sinco at para 50, Evialis was distinguishable on the fac......
-
Ferrexpo AG v Gilson Investments Ltd and Ors
...any counterclaim or cross-claim: Briggs & Rees (loc cit) at para 2–242.) For the reasons that I sought to explain in Evialis v SIAT, [2003] EWHC 863 (Comm) at paras 116 to 130, I think that generally the proper approach is to look at the proceedings as a whole and to ask what is the cen......
-
Trappit S.A. v American Express Europe LLC
...i.e. to discourage a multiplicity of proceedings: Recital (15) of the Brussels Regulation; see also Evialis SA v SIAT and others [2003] EWHC 863 (Comm), Andrew Smith J at [127], citing the dictum of Saville LJ in ‘The Happy Fellow’ [1998] 1 Lloyd's Rep 13 at 17–18.” Concurrent Proceedings ......
-
Royal Bank of Canada v Cooperative Centrale Raiffeisen-Boorenleenbank Binding Authority
...to act by way of injunction to give effect to the agreement of the parties." 64 In Evialis SA v SIAT and ors, [2003] EWHC 863, [2003] 2 Lloyd's Rep 377 at para 103, I expressed the view that the basis for the decision in the Sabah Shipyard case was that the Government of Pakistan was in br......
Get Started for Free
1 firm's commentaries
-
Jurisdiction Dispute Under Articles 27 And 30 Of EU Regulation 44/2001: Syndicate 980 V Sinco S.A. [2008] EWHC 1842 (Comm.)
...claims in the English proceedings. This approach was in line with the decision of the court in the case of Evialis SA v SIAT [2003] 2 Lloyd's Rep 377 focus on the central or essential issue of the claim in deciding whether two sets of proceedings involved the same cause of action. In the pr......
21 books & journal articles
-
Chapter 9: Regulation (EC) No.593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)
...Corporation [1996] 1 Lloyd's Rep 380;Gan Insurance Co Ltd v.TaiPing Insurance Co Ltd [1999] Lloyd's Rep IR 472;EvialisSA v. SIAT [2003] EWHC 863 (Comm). Under the equivalent provision in the Rome Convention (also Article 3(1)), the relevant test was ‘demonstrated with reasonable certainty’,......
-
Chapter 15: Applicable Law
...2001 No. 2635, reg. 4(2). For these purposes “the law of that state” must include its choice of law rules: Evialis v SIAT [2003] EWHC 863 (Comm), [2003] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 377 at para. 38. SI 2001 No. 2635, reg. 4(3). 4 SI 2001 No. 2635, reg. 4(4). 5 SI 2001 No. 2635, reg. 4(5). 6 SI 2001 No. 26......
-
Chapter 14: Cargo insurance and open covers
...to the commercial advantages of an ‘open cover’, but was probably intending to refer to a floating policy. 30 Evialis SA v SIAT [2003] EWHC 863 (Comm); [2003] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 377, [36] (Andrew Smith J); cf. Macleod Ross and Co v Cie d’Assurance Generales l’Helvetia [1952] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 12 (op......
-
Chapter 5: Reinsurance Jurisdiction – Brussels Regulation
...Trasporti v. Hugo Trumpy [1999] ECR I-1597, note 1. 53 C-22/85 Anterist v. Credit Lyonnais [1986] ECR I-1951. 54 Evialis v. SIAT [2004] Lloyd’s Rep. IR 187, 203. C-23/78 Meeth v. Glacetal [1978] ECR I-2133 at [5], also stressing in the context of Article 23 the overall objective of the Brus......
Get Started for Free
