Determination of the application
Determination of the application
The Charterers have the burden of proving that they have a good arguable case that they contracted with Middle Volga under the Charterparty which incorporated the English jurisdiction agreement. Unless Middle Volga was a party to that contract, the Court’s jurisdiction cannot be established pursuant to CPR rule 6.33(2B).
I shall consider the scope of CPR rule 6.33(2B) and then the meaning and application of the good arguable case approach in disposing of applications contesting jurisdiction, before applying those principles to the current application.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Factual background
- The (alleged) Head Charterparty
- Delivery of the Vessels
- Withdrawal of the Vessels
- The Charterers’ claim
- Middle Volga’s application challenging jurisdiction
- The issue to be addressed
- Middle Volga’s submissions
- The Charterers’ submissions
- Determination of the application
- CPR rule 6.33(2B)(b) and (c)
- A good arguable case that there is a binding contract
- Application to the present case
- Conclusions
![[2025] EWHC 2089 (Comm)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_WAai98v.png)