Comity meaning

STS Seatoshore Group Pte Ltd…Claimant and Wansa Commodities Pte Ltd…Defendant [2024] SGHC 266 What are the practical implications of this case? This decision underscores the importance of international comity when there has been delay in asking for anti-suit protection, even where overseas litigation is brought contrary to an arbitration clause. The longer the foreign case has progressed, the weightier the comity concerns become, since an anti-suit injunction (if followed) would squander the judicial effort already invested by the foreign court. Judges are likewise more reluctant to issue anti-suit orders where tardiness has led to a foreign judgment being handed down, because such orders would indirectly impede the enforcement of that judgment in its own forum. Therefore, a party intending to seek anti-suit relief should act at once, as soon as proceedings abroad are started. It is no excuse that the party is simultaneously contesting jurisdiction before the foreign court: an applicant cannot try its luck twice by applying for anti-suit relief only after unfavourable rulings on its jurisdictional...

Original news Re V (a child) (recognition of foreign adoption) [2017] EWHC 1733 (Fam), [2017] All ER (D) 59 (Jul) The applicants, Nigerian citizens temporarily present in the UK, sought recognition of a Nigerian adoption order. Having reviewed the full range of criteria relevant to acknowledging adoptions made abroad, the Family Court granted the application. Why does this matter, and what should practitioners take from it? The decision engages the doctrine of comity in the context of recognising adoption orders from other jurisdictions. Where the order originates in a state that has ratified the Hague Convention of 29 May 1993 on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, it is automatically recognised as a Chapter 4 ‘overseas adoption’ (Adoption and Children Act 2002, ss 66, 87; Adoption (Recognition of Overseas Adoptions) Order 2013, SI 1801/2013). By contrast, adoptions from countries not on the recognised ‘overseas adoption’ list, including Nigeria, only take effect in English law if the High Court recognises them under its inherent powers....

In this issue: Arbitration in England & Wales International arbitration Institutional and ad-hoc arbitration Other arbitration and ADR-related news and developments New Law Journal New and updated content Daily and weekly news alerts Arbitration in England & Wales Court of Appeal—anti-suit injunctions and injunctions generally not available against states unless one of the exceptions in section 13 of the State Immunity Act 1978 applies In UK P&I Club N.V. v Republica Bolivariana de Venezuela, the Court of Appeal reaffirmed the doctrine of state immunity. Refusing an anti-suit injunction in a commercial dispute with Venezuela, the court underscored the proper objective of adherence to international law: advancing comity and sound relations among states by recognising the sovereignty of other nations. It further held that the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) should, so far as practicable, be construed in concert with the wider corpus of international law of which it forms a component, including norms governing the...

Allocation of jurisdiction within the UK under the CJJA 1982 This Practice Note explores how jurisdiction is apportioned across the UK under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 (CJJA 1982). It examines the scope of that regime and the conditions that must be satisfied for it to apply, and considers its interaction with Regulation 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) (the Regulation). It sets out the primary rule together with the departures from it, and, lastly, addresses forum non conveniens in this setting. The CJJA’s intra-UK jurisdiction framework is designed to furnish rules allocating jurisdiction inside the UK itself. Distinct rules and factors arise when assessing whether UK courts possess jurisdiction over a claim that contains an international dimension. The UK comprises four countries, yet there are only three legal jurisdictions, and CJJA 1982, s 50, describes each as ‘parts of the UK’. England and Wales Scotland Northern Ireland Practitioners in England engaged in cross-border disputes must be cognisant of a range...

This Practice Note surveys New Zealand’s law on state immunity in general terms before moving to the two scenarios noted above. For an overview of arbitration in New Zealand, see Arbitration in New Zealand—an introduction. For approaches to challenging the jurisdiction of arbitration awards more broadly, see Practice Note: Challenging jurisdiction and anti-suit provisions in New Zealand. State immunity can be pertinent to arbitration in two ways: a challenge to the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction grounded in state immunity, or a challenge to enforcement of the arbitration award relying on state immunity The application of state immunity to investment arbitration awards under the Arbitration (International Investment Disputes) Act 1979 is addressed separately below. Note: New Zealand judgments below are not reported by LexisNexis®. State immunity in New Zealand: generally A state named as a defendant may dispute the court’s jurisdiction by invoking state immunity. The doctrine rests on comity and international law, because the assertion of national court jurisdiction over...

This Practice Note examines the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in the British Virgin Islands (BVI). The Arbitration Act 2013—an introduction to recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in the BVI On 1 October 2014, the Arbitration Act 2013 (the Arbitration Act 2013) took legal effect in the BVI. The Arbitration Act 2013 superseded the Arbitration Ordinance 1976 (the old Act) and constitutes a modern arbitration statute. The Arbitration Act 2013 was crafted to address the deficiencies of the old Act. It adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law, with certain limited amendments and supplementary provisions. As one would anticipate of legislation rooted in comity, the Arbitration Act 2013 expressly stipulates that, when interpreting its provisions, the courts must take account of its international origin and the necessity of promoting both uniformity in its application, and the consistent observance of good faith. As a further complement to the implementation of the Arbitration Act 2013, on 25 May 2014 the UK—after liaising with the Governor’s...