||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 291 (Jul)
|| EWCA Civ 864
||Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Longmore, Lloyd and Gross LJJ
||Laurence Rabinowitz QC and Daniel Jowell (instructed by Linklaters LLP) for the Dow defendants.
||David Foxton QC and Philippa Hopkins (instructed by SJ Berwin LLP) for the claimants.
||23 July 2010
Jurisdiction - Concurrent proceedings - Assumption of jurisdiction - Proceedings in Italy being heard and effectively dismissed - Proceedings concerning claims for breach of European Union rules on competition - Application for stay - Appeal proceedings in Italian court outstanding - Whether English court having jurisdiction - EC Treaty, art 81 - Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001, arts 2, 6(1), 28.
Jurisdiction Concurrent proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held in the context of proceedings taken by tyre manufacturers following a decision of the European Commission decision holding certain producers of Butadiene Rubber (BR) and Emulsion Styrene Butadiene Rubber (ESBR) in breach of art 81 of the EC Treaty, that the English courts had jurisdiction to hear claims connected with those proceedings by virtue of art 6(1) of Council Regulation (EC) 44-2001. The appeal against the failed application for a stay of the proceedings pursuant to, inter alia, art 28 of the Regulation would be dismissed.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports