Accessibility Skip to Global Navigation Skip to Local Navigation Skip to Content Skip to Search Skip to Site Map

Articles for the keyword(s) "Non-exclusive jurisdiction clauses"

"Conflict of Laws"

RJ Paterson, 1992

The author reviews significant Conflict of Laws cases from 1990 and 1992. The review focuses on the existence of jurisdiction, submission to jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction, as well as the relevance and application of forum non conveniens with reference to protest to jurisdiction, jurisdiction clauses, lis alibi pendens, service within New Zealand, and summary judgment proceedings, as well as family law proceedings and international child abduction cases. The author also covers the enforcement of foreign judgments at common law, as well as by statute.

^ Top of page

"Trading with the US – Forum and Choice of Law Clauses"

John Fellas, 1996

In a brief comment on Telemedia Partners Worldwide Ltd v Hamelin Limited SDNY, February 6, 1996, the author provides guidelines for New Zealand practitioners in regard to the drafting of suitable jurisdiction and choice of law clauses in international contracts involving the US.

^ Top of page

"The Hague and the Ditch: The Trans-Tasman Judicial Area and the Choice of Court Convention"

Reid Mortensen, 2009

Following an analysis of the history and current context of the proposed Trans-Tasman regime (within the CER framework), this article explores the comparative value of the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements for Australia and New Zealand. Although the Convention and the proposed Trans-Tasman regime are profoundly different, the author concludes that the adoption of the Convention would provide an opportunity for both countries to increase certainty in international trade and commercial relationships. More specifically, reference to the Convention would address the risk of lis pendens and incompatible judgments in the proposed Trans-Tasman regime.

^ Top of page

“Rethinking Jurisdiction Clauses in New Zealand: The Hague Convention and Beyond”

Michelle Ong, 2013

In this article, the author advocates for the routine enforcement of jurisdiction clauses based on the fundamental principles of respect for party autonomy and freedom of contract. The author criticises the courts’ current approach to the categorisation of jurisdiction clauses under the labels of exclusive and non-exclusive and suggests an alternative, more nuanced approach. Further criticism is focused on the courts’ failure to apply consistent tests in deciding whether or not to exercise jurisdiction. The Trans-Tasman Treaty is commended for its insistence on stricter enforcement of jurisdiction clauses however the author argues that there is scope to go further. In this context the author compares the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements and the Trans-Tasman Treaty.