Question 1 (50%)
“Chapter III of the Brussels I Recast Regulation is unfair on judgment-debtors not domiciled in a member state of the European Union. Chapter III ought to be amended so as to confine its scope of application to cases where the judgment- debtor is domiciled in a member state of the European Union or the court of origin had jurisdiction under Arts. 7 to 26 of the Regulation.”
Critically discuss this statement.
Question 2 (50%)
Nina, who is originally from Croatia but has lived in England for many years, is an ardent supporter of the Croatian football team. In June 2016, she attended the match between the Croatian team and the Turkish team in Paris during the European football cup. After the match, Nina was attacked by a fan of the Turkish team and broke her arm. The attack was witnessed by Croatian and Turkish fans. Nina received emergency medical treatment in France, and further treatment in a private hospital in England. She was not able to work for four weeks and lost income as a result. The assailant has been identified as Edip, who lives in Turkey.
Having recovered from the injury, Nina decided to buy some football memorabilia. She saw an online advertisement for a shirt of the Croatian national football team which was said to have been worn and signed by the famous Croatian footballer Davor Srna. The advertisement was in English and was made by Mira, who lives in Serbia and is not a trader. Writing in English, Nina sent an email to Mira, offering £500 for the shirt. Mira emailed back (also in English), saying that she accepted that price and asking Nina for her credit card details. Nina provided the details and received the shirt a week later. However, it transpired that Davor Srna never wore the shirt and that the signature on the shirt is not his. Mira knew this.
Nina wants to sue Edip in England to claim damages for lost income and medical costs. Nina wants to sue Mira in England to claim damages in the amount of £500.
Answer all of the following questions:
(a) Discuss the likelihood of an English court exercising jurisdiction in respect of Nina’s action against Edip, who contests the jurisdiction.
(b) Assume that Edip has submitted to the jurisdiction of the English courts. Discuss the choice-of-law aspects of Nina’s action against Edip.
(c) Would your answer to (b) be different if Edip has lived in England since 2014?
(d) Discuss the likelihood of an English court exercising jurisdiction in respect of Nina’s action against Mira, who contests the jurisdiction.
(e) Assume that Mira has submitted to the jurisdiction of the English courts. Discuss the choice-of-law aspects of Nina’s action against Mira.
Question 1 (50%)