Jurisdiction of Parent Companies’ Home State Courts over Foreign Subsidiaries Abroad: A Comparative Approach between the Netherlands and the United Kingdom

C. Mandap
{"title":"Jurisdiction of Parent Companies’ Home State Courts over Foreign Subsidiaries Abroad: A Comparative Approach between the Netherlands and the United Kingdom","authors":"C. Mandap","doi":"10.37974/ALF.331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the increasing trend on liabilities of multinational corporations through foreign direct liability claims, more and more cases are brought before the home state courts of parent companies. In such cases, the victims abroad would aim to bring litigation against both the subsidiary company which operations caused the damage to the victims, and the parent company which arguable owes a duty of care towards its subsidiary. Therefore, a case in tort of negligence is filed against both defendants before one and the same court, the home state’s court. Against this backdrop, the initial hurdle faced by the plaintiffs/claimants are issues regarding the jurisdiction of the court. This is particularly difficult when the defendant is a subsidiary based abroad, the plaintiffs are based abroad and the damage is abroad. This paper analysed the approach of the courts in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom based on existing and most recent case laws on the topic along with the applicable private international law, such as the Brussels I Recast Regulation that is binding on all European Union (EU) Member State.","PeriodicalId":243475,"journal":{"name":"Amsterdam Law Forum","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Amsterdam Law Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37974/ALF.331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With the increasing trend on liabilities of multinational corporations through foreign direct liability claims, more and more cases are brought before the home state courts of parent companies. In such cases, the victims abroad would aim to bring litigation against both the subsidiary company which operations caused the damage to the victims, and the parent company which arguable owes a duty of care towards its subsidiary. Therefore, a case in tort of negligence is filed against both defendants before one and the same court, the home state’s court. Against this backdrop, the initial hurdle faced by the plaintiffs/claimants are issues regarding the jurisdiction of the court. This is particularly difficult when the defendant is a subsidiary based abroad, the plaintiffs are based abroad and the damage is abroad. This paper analysed the approach of the courts in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom based on existing and most recent case laws on the topic along with the applicable private international law, such as the Brussels I Recast Regulation that is binding on all European Union (EU) Member State.
母公司所在州法院对海外子公司的管辖权:荷兰与英国的比较研究
随着跨国公司对外直接责任索赔的趋势日益明显,越来越多的跨国公司向母公司所在国法院提起诉讼。在这种情况下,国外的受害者既要对业务对受害者造成损害的子公司提起诉讼,也要对可能对其子公司负有注意义务的母公司提起诉讼。因此,过失侵权案件是在同一个法院,即所在州的法院,对两个被告提起诉讼。在这种背景下,原告/索赔人面临的最初障碍是法院的管辖权问题。当被告是在国外的子公司,原告在国外,损害在国外时,这一点尤其困难。本文分析了荷兰和英国法院基于现有的和最新的关于该主题的判例法以及适用的国际私法的做法,例如对所有欧盟(EU)成员国具有约束力的《布鲁塞尔I重铸条例》。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信