½Û×ÓÊÓƵ

View the related checklists about Jurisdiction

Determining applicable law and jurisdiction, and the territorial scope of statutory employment rights—checklist

Determining applicable law and jurisdiction, and the territorial scope of statutory employment rights—checklist This Checklist provides an overview of the questions to be asked when determining: • which system of law is applicable to a contract of employment or employment relationship (applicable law) • whose courts and/or tribunals should decide an employment case (jurisdiction), and • how the courts and employment tribunals decide what statutory rights, if any, an employee who works abroad and/or has a foreign employer (territorial application or scope of statutory employment rights) Brexit impact From exit day (31 January 2020) the UK ceased to be an EU Member State but, in accordance with the transitional arrangements provided in the Withdrawal Agreement, the UK was in an implementation period (IP) until 11pm on 31 December 2020, known as ‘IP completion day’. During this period, the UK continued to be treated by the EU as a Member State for many purposes. While it could not participate in the political institutions and governance structures of the EU, the UK...

Ireland—Determining jurisdiction in civil litigation—checklist

Ireland—Determining jurisdiction in civil litigation—checklist This Checklist offers guidance on how to determine whether an Irish court has jurisdiction to deal with the specific civil dispute. In doing so, it considers provisions under Brussels I (recast), the Lugano Convention and the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. This Checklist provides an overview of jurisdiction in terms of considering whether the dispute should be dealt with in Ireland. For guidance on: • which specific court an action should be raised in, see Practice Note: Ireland—Starting a civil action • other issues to consider before bringing a civil claim in an Irish court and how to start and progress a civil claim in Ireland, see Practice Notes: Ireland—Starting a civil action and Ireland—Pre-action conduct, and in initiating and case managing a civil claim, Ireland—Progressing and managing a High Court civil claim respectively • other aspects of Irish civil litigation, see: Ireland—Alternative dispute resolution and settlement—overview which links through to detailed guidance on specific aspects of dispute resolution in Ireland This Checklist...

View the related flowcharts about Jurisdiction

Cross-border service—flowchart

Cross-border service—flowchart This flowchart sets out the steps required to ensure effective service of the claim form out of the jurisdiction. It should be read alongside

View the related practice notes about Jurisdiction

Employment claims in Scottish civil courts

Employment claims in Scottish civil courts Scottish civil courts, like their counterparts in England and Wales, can and do decide certain employment disputes. However, there are very significant differences between the civil court systems in Scotland and in England and Wales which practitioners need to be aware of. This Practice Note provides an overview of: • the most common orders sought by employment lawyers in Scottish civil courts • the structure of the Scottish civil court system • the jurisdiction and key features of each relevant court • rights of audience • rules of procedure • important points about: ◦ breach of contract claims in Scotland ◦ injunctive (interlocutory) relief in Scotland ◦ dawn raids in Scotland ◦ industrial relations disputes in Scotland ◦ equality of terms claims in Scotland The purpose of this Practice Note is to provide an introduction to the key features of the Scottish civil court system for employment lawyers. It is not intended to and does not purport to be a comprehensive account of...

Application for disclosure of information supplied in order to obtain a warrant

Application for disclosure of information supplied in order to obtain a warrant The procedure for the hearing of an application for access to the information and material used to obtain a search warrant or comparable order, where the investigator wants the court to withhold that information, is governed by Criminal Procedure Rules 2020 (CrimPR 2020), SI 2020/759, rr 5.7–5.10. These rules have been amended to codify the decision in Metropolitan Police Commissioner v Bangs, which is analysed in this Practice Note. Does a magistrate have jurisdiction to hear an application? Following Eastenders Cash and Carry v South Western Magistrates Court a magistrate would be correct to adopt the starting point that a claimant was entitled to see the information which persuaded the court to issue a search warrant unless the public interest requires that some or all of the material relied upon should not be disclosed. When a court is considering an application for a search warrant and exercises its statutory power to grant one, the...

View the related precedents about Jurisdiction

Tax disclosure—bond issue offering document

United Kingdom Taxation General The summary set out below describes certain taxation matters of the United Kingdom based on the Issuer’s understanding of current law and HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) published practice as at the date of this document, both of which are subject to change, possibly with retrospective effect. The summary is intended as a general guide only and is not intended to be, nor should it be construed to be, tax or legal advice. The summary applies only to persons who are the absolute beneficial owners of Bonds, who hold their Bonds as investments and who are resident and, in the case of individual shareholders, domiciled in the UK for taxation purposes at all relevant times. In particular Bondholders holding their Bonds through a depositary receipt system or clearance service should note that they may...

Ireland—Notice of assignment of contractual rights and form of acknowledgement for an assignment by way of security: single company assignor—bilateral—specific monies

Notice of assignment of contractual rights from an assignor incorporated as a limited company in Ireland with a form of acknowledgement from the contract counterparty This is a Precedent Notice of Assignment which can be used to give notice of an assignment of contractual rights by way of security from an assignor to its contract counterparty. This drafting note explains the context in which this Precedent Notice of Assignment might be used as well as the features of this Precedent Notice of Assignment and the assumptions on which it is based. For information on taking security over contractual rights, see Practice Note: Ireland—Assignments by way of security. Parties to this Precedent Notice of Assignment This Precedent Notice of Assignment is designed for use in bilateral transactions (ie where there is only one lender) as opposed to syndicated transactions (ie where there is more than one lender). It has been drafted as being: • from a single security provider (defined as the ‘Assignor’) • to its contract counterparty and refers to...

View the related q&as about Jurisdiction

In the context of understanding whether or not permission is needed to serve debt proceedings on a company based in Jersey where there is an express jurisdictional clause in the contract submitting to the English courts, could Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) apply?

In the context of understanding whether or not permission is needed to serve debt proceedings on a company based in Jersey where there is an express jurisdictional clause in the contract submitting to the English courts, could Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) apply? This Q&A considers the relevance of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) when considering whether permission is required to serve out of the jurisdiction. What is the relevance of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 (Brussels I (recast)) when considering whether permission is required to serve out of the jurisdiction? Permission is not required to serve a claim form out of the jurisdiction where the factors in CPR 6.32 or CPR 6.33 are satisfied (note that CPR 6.32 is not relevant in this instance as it only applies to Scotland and Northern Ireland). CPR 6.33 sets out various scenarios where the permission of the court is not required to serve out of the UK. These include (at CPR 6.33(2)) reference to various provisions of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 (Brussels I...

Is security for costs available against a company prior to starting proceeding? Just because a company is based abroad in a non-convention state, is security for costs automatically granted?

Is security for costs available against a company prior to starting proceeding? Just because a company is based abroad in a non-convention state, is security for costs automatically granted? Is security for costs available against a company prior to starting proceedings? Security for costs is only available when there are actual court proceedings. It is not available pre-action. Although pre-action costs can be recovered in litigation and may, therefore, form part of an application for security, there is little that defendants can do to protect themselves regarding pre-action costs if there is no subsequent litigation. For guidance on recovering pre-action costs, see Practice Note: Pre-action—costs recovery. Just because a company is based abroad in a non-convention state, is security for costs automatically granted? Pursuant to CPR 25.13, a court may make an order for security for costs if: ‘it is satisfied, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, that it is just to make such an order, and… one or more of the conditions in...

View the related News about Jurisdiction

Devas v Antrix—US Supreme Court revive application to enforce US$1.3bn arbitral award

Law360: The US Supreme Court on 5 June 2025 overturned a Ninth Circuit decision refusing to enforce a US$1.3bn arbitral award issued to an Indian satellite communications company, ruling that the court's outlier interpretation of a jurisdictional question was incorrect.

Amending objects of a Royal Charter charity (Governors of the Free Grammar School of John Lyon v Attorney General)

Private Client analysis: This case examined how the charitable objects of Harrow School and The John Lyon School could be amended in principle. The court held that the schools' objects continued to be those that were set out in the 1572 Royal Charter by which Harrow School was established, despite the undertaking of the original corporation having been transferred to another body in the 19th century. Consequently, any amendments to the objects could only be made by the court (or the Charity Commission) giving effect to a scheme under section 68 of the Charities Act 2011 (ChA 2011) or by the charity exercising the statutory power of amendment set out in ChA 2011, s 280C, in both cases subject to approval by Order in Council. The court also found that ChA 2011, s 75ZA does not enable the court (or the Charity Commission) to make a scheme inconsistent with a Royal Charter or statute. This reaffirmed the ‘higher authority principle’ confirming that the scheme-making jurisdiction of the court cannot override...