International Litigation Quiz

A third party investor finances a lawsuit in exchange for a percentage of the potential winnings.

A plaintiff can be sued in the courts of the country where they reside.

A person can be sued in the court of the agreed-upon location for fulfilling a contractual obligation.

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has the power to ensure a consistent interpretation of EU law across all EU member states.

Domestic courts can request an interpretation of EU law from the CJEU to ensure uniformity in applying EU legislation.

A domestic court cannot be challenged through the appeal process, making the CJEU the final authority.

The CJEU may refuse to address a preliminary ruling if the legal dispute is not genuine or if the national proceedings have been terminated.

A preliminary ruling is a request for clarification from the CJEU on EU law while an appeal challenges a previous judicial decision.

A situation where a national court seeks clarification from the CJEU on a point of EU Law, typically before making a final judgment.

The CJEU will not issue a preliminary ruling if the EU Law issue is clear and unambiguous (acte clair) or if the issue has already been resolved in a prior decision.

French is the official language of the CJEU, but proceedings can also be conducted in other official EU languages.

The 2005 Hague Convention applies when parties in a civil or commercial matter are from different countries and have agreed to an exclusive choice of court agreement.

When parties agree to a choice of court, the agreed court has jurisdiction regardless of where the parties are located.

Choice of forum agreements are particularly important in international scenarios because they prevent jurisdictional disputes and provide certainty.

The 2005 Hague Convention was signed and ratified by the EU, Mexico, Singapore, and Montenegro as of September 2020.

Article 25 of the Brussels I Recast does not apply when a choice of court clause in a contract directs jurisdiction to a court outside the EU (e.g., New York), even if the parties are domiciled within the EU.

If the parties have agreed on an exclusive choice of court agreement, designating only the courts in Paris to have jurisdiction, this means that all other courts that might be competent but recognize this choice of court agreement have been deprived of jurisdiction.

The choice of court agreement in this case is not covered by the 2005 Hague Convention because it allows for proceedings by the lender against the the borrower to be brought in the courts of England, which is not a Contracting State under the convention.

Yes, because the 2005 Hague Convention applies to judicial settlements regarding choice of court agreements, and this is a situation where Mary agrees to pay a specific amount in Singapore, which is a Contracting State.

Yes.  This clause is in line with Article 25 of the Brussels I Recast, which provides that a court of a Member State shall have jurisdiction over an action brought against a defendant domiciled in a non-Member State, under the provisions of an agreement which is in writing and which contains an express or tacit choice of such court.

The clause in the patent license agreement designates the courts of Italy to have jurisdiction to settle any disputes that may arise out of or in connection with the agreement. Since the agreement was breached in Austria and Luxembourg, the courts of Italy could have jurisdiction to settle the dispute.

A court that first receives a lawsuit will decide the case on its merits, even if another lawsuit involving the same claim is filed in a different court later.

If a company's agreement specifies a particular court for resolving disputes with shareholders, that court will have jurisdiction, even if a shareholder is not physically present in that country.

If a defendant does not object to a court's jurisdiction during the proceedings, they cannot later argue that the judgment is not valid in another country where they have assets.

A court might assume jurisdiction based on a mistake about where the contract was to be performed. However, this does not necessarily mean that the judgment will be recognized in another country if the court lacked actual jurisdiction.

A default judgment is a decision made when a defendant does not respond to a lawsuit. This judgment may not be recognized in another country if the defendant did not receive proper notice of the proceedings.