Views
Nothing Found
Sorry, no posts matched your criteria
News
United Kingdom Supreme Court rules on a jurisdictional issue against Shell
In a landmark decision in the case of Okpabi and others v Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Another, the United Kingdom Supreme Court (“UKSC”) ruled on a jurisdictional issue on whether the claimants/appellants have an arguable case that the defendants/respondents – Royal Dutch Shell (an English domiciled company) – owed them a common law duty of care so as properly to found jurisdiction against a foreign subsidiary company (Shell Petroleum Development Corporation Limited, domiciled in Nigeria) as a necessary and proper party to the proceedings. This jurisdictional aspect was concerned with whether there was a real issue to be tried against the anchor defendant – Royal Dutch Shell (an English domiciled company).
The facts of the case was that the claimants/appellants, who are Nigerian citizens alleged that as a result of the negligence of Shell Petroleum Development Corporation Limited, numerous oil spills have occurred from oil pipelines and associated infrastructure operated in the vicinity of the claimants’/appellants’ communities. It is said that these oil spills have caused widespread environmental damage, including serious water and ground contamination, and have not been adequately cleaned up or remediated. It is also alleged that as a result of the spills, the natural water sources in the claimants’/appellants’ communities cannot safely be used for drinking, fishing, agricultural, washing or recreational purposes.
The High Court and Court of Appeal resolved this jurisdictional issue against the claimants/appellants, but the UKSC found merit in their appeal.
Analyses and comments on this decision are most welcome!
First Issue of 2021’s Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
The first issue of Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly for 2021 features the following private international law articles:
Adrian Briggs, “A Conflict of Comity in the Enforcement of Judgments”
Patrick Dunn-Walsh, “Insurance Litigation under the Recast Brussels Regulation”
Anthony Kennedy, “A Place to Start”
Myron Phua and Serena Seo Yeon Lee, “Taxonomising “Quasi-Contractual” Anti-suit Injunctions”
UK notifies that it considers the Brussels and Rome Convention to no longer apply to it
Steve Peers (University of Essex) has just published a series of Brexit-related documents on Twitter, two of which appear to confirm that by leaving the European Union, the UK also (believes to have) ceased to be a party to the 1968 Brussels Convention and the 1980 Rome Convention – which many have argued might revive between the UK and those EU Member States who are parties to them.
The two letters, sent by the UK Government to the Council of the EU, both contain the following paragraph:
The Government of the United Kingdom hereby notifies the Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union that it considers that the [Brussels Convention] / [Rome Convention] ceased to apply to the United Kingdom and Gibraltar from 1 January 2021, as a consequence of the United Kingdom ceasing to be a Member State of the European Union and of the end of the Transition Period.