Out of the jurisdiction

Credit Agricole Indosuez v Unicof Ltd and others [2004] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 196

Although the burden is on a claimant seeking leave pursuant to CPR rule 6.20 to serve out of the jurisdiction to show that England is the appropriate forum, the fact of continuing proceedings in England against other defendants on the same or closely allied issues virtually concludes the question, since all courts recognise the undesirability of duplication of proceedings. Although there were connecting factors with Kenya, if proceedings were going on in the English jurisdiction on the selfsame or linked issues, England was clearly the most appropriate forum for those common and connected issues to be tried between all relevant parties. Once it was accepted that claims were going to proceed in England against other defendants, the exercise of the court’s discretion and the forum conveniens issue were virtually automatically resolved in favour of permission to serve out of the jurisdiction if the trial on liability was to occur within the jurisdiction.