The Lugano Convention - Chapter 2.3, Jurisdiction under English Law - 2.4 - Transnational Litigation and Commercial Arbitration - 3rd Edition
Joseph Lookofsky is Professor of Private and Commercial Law at the University of Copenhagen. He received his B.A. in Economics from Lehigh University, his J.D. from the New York University School of Law, and was admitted to the New York State Bar in 1971. He received his Danish law degrees (cand.jur. and dr.jur.) from the University of Copenhagen and joined the Law Faculty there in 1982. Professor Lookofsky has lectured on the CISG and other international commercial law topics for the Danish Bar Association (Advokatsamfund), the Duke University Law School in North Carolina, the University of Bologna (Facoltá di Giurisprudenza), the Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg (Institut für Ausländisches und Internationales Privatrecht), and the Cornell-Paris I (Sorbonne) Summer Institute of International & Comparative Law. He is also Secretary General of the Danish Committee for Comparative Law (Association Internationale des Sciences Juridiques.
Ketilbjorn Hertz is Senior Consultant with the Danish Ministry of Justice, which he joined in 1997, and in that capacity he has participated in the drafting of important legislation, including the Bill, which led to the adoption of the Danish Arbitration Act 2005 He received degrees from the University of Copenhagen, B.A. in law in 1991, cand.jur. in 1993, B.A. in French in 1998, and Ph.D. in law in 1998.
2.3. THE LUGANO CONVENTION
The Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters was done at Lugano on September 16, 1988.1 Designed primarily as a bridge between the EC and the EFTA group,2 the Lugano Convention was a modified version of the 1968 Brussels Convention as amended.3 Its main purpose was to join the EFTA and the EC Member States together – as closely as practicable – under one jurisdictional and enforcement system.
Generally speaking, the original (1988) Lugano Convention was an exact copy of the Brussels Convention of that time, since most of the provisions were worded identically. There were a few differences, of two different kinds. Some were seen as improvements, e.g. as regards how to deal with employment contracts, and those differences all but disappeared when the Lugano improvements were incorporated into the Brussels Convention by the 1989 Accession Convention.4 Some were actual derogations introducing extra grounds for refusing recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. These various differences not withstanding, the general picture after the 1989 Accession Convention was that the same jurisdiction and enforcement regime applied in the 18 Lugano Convention Contracting States as in the then 12 EC Member States.
2.3 The Lugano Convention2.4 Jurisdiction Under English Law 2.4.1 Introduction 2.4.2 Jurisdiction in Contract Under English Law Underweser Reederei v. Zapata Off-Shore (1969) Notes, Questions & Commentary Brinkibon Ltd. v Stahag Stahl (1982) Notes, Questions & Commentary Spiliada Maritime v Cansulex (1987) Notes, Questions & Commentary Roneleigh Ltd. v MII Exports (1988) Notes, Questions & Commentary