The Restriction of the Power of the Courts to Stay Proceedings in Favour of More Appropriate International Courts: The Decision in Owusu v Jackson
| Author | Surekha Rodrigo |
| Pages | 59-64 |
S.S.L.R. The Decision in Owusu v Jackson
59
Vol.2
The Restriction of the Power of the Courts to Stay
Proceedings in Favour of More Appropriate
International Courts: The Decision in Owusu v
Jackson
Surekha Rodrigo
The judgment in Owusu v Jackson has provided an answer to the controversy
over whether courts of EU Member States have discretion to stay proceedings
in favour of courts of non-Member States. Specifically, the European Court of
Justice established that the doctrine of forum non conveniens could not be
used so as to refuse jurisdiction and stay the English court proceedings in
favour of the Jamaican courts, in this case. The question to be considered is
whether this restriction on the ability to stay proceedings in favour of courts of
non-Member States extends to other bases of jurisdiction provided for in the
EC Regulation 44/2001. This article seeks to explore the extent of the decision
in Owusu v Jackson alongside an analysis of the academic commentary and
case law in the area, which attempt to mitigate the restrictions, brought about
by the judgment.
Introduction
wusu v Jackson
1 answered the hotly debated question of whether a
Member State court was permitted to stay the proceedings against a
defendant on the grounds that the non-Member State was a more
appropriate forum for trial.2 The decision overturned the previous case law
and by restricting the Member States from staying proceedings or declining
jurisdiction, in favour of more appropriate forums, has raised a number of
debates. The main issue has been the question as to how far this restriction
extends. The Court specifically referred to Article 2 of the EC Regulation
44/2001 (the Regulation) and thus it is questionable as to which other
provisions of the Regulation this decision applies.3 The other provisions are
1 Case C–281/02 Owusu v. Jackson [2005] 2 WLR 942.
2 C.M.V. Clarkson and Jonathan Hill, The Conflict of Laws (4th edn OUP, New York 2011) 138.
3 Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and
enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters [2001] O. J. L012/1.
O
To continue reading
Request your trial