Controlling Forum-Shopping: The Impact of MacShannon v. Rockware Glass Ltd

Controlling Forum-Shopping: The Impact of MacShannon v. Rockware Glass Ltd

Forum-shopping is now part of the English conflict of laws, yet it is often criticised for producing an unfair result for the defendant. There are however, means to control forum-shopping of which staying proceedings is the most effective. This article examines the House of Lords' decision in M...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The International and comparative law quarterly 1986-04, Vol.35 (2), p.374-412
1. Verfasser: Schuz, Rhona
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Banks
Comparative law
CONFLICT OF LAWS
Court orders
COURT RULES AND PROCEDURE
Defendants
Foreign courts
Forum non conveniens
Injunctions
International law
JURISDICTION
Plaintiffs
Regulation
Trials
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 412
container_issue 2
container_start_page 374
container_title The International and comparative law quarterly
container_volume 35
creator Schuz, Rhona
description Forum-shopping is now part of the English conflict of laws, yet it is often criticised for producing an unfair result for the defendant. There are however, means to control forum-shopping of which staying proceedings is the most effective. This article examines the House of Lords' decision in MacShannon V. Rockware Glass Ltd (1978) A.C. 795 as it radically altered the test for staying proceedings where England is not the most suitable forum.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/iclqaj/35.2.374
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1310302519</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><informt_id>10.3316/agispt.19870975</informt_id><jstor_id>759233</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>759233</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c479t-9e6e930cb9cfa82888451de0c2dcdf2638f0e83167b872f98ec9b0b6172eebc23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkM2P0zAQxS0EEmXhzIGLJSRuaf0RxzY3VNGyqy6IbhESl5HjOG26SZy1Xdj970kJ7IHTaPR-82bmIfSakjklmi8a296Z44KLOZtzmT9BM5pLmhVKi6doRggjmVCaP0cvYjwSQgsuxAxdLX2fgm_bpt_jlQ-nLrs5-GEY2_d4d3D4shuMTdjX-NrYm4Ppe9_jn3O89fb2lwkOr1sTI96k6iV6Vps2uld_6wX6tvq4W37KNl_Wl8sPm8zmUqdMu8JpTmypbW0UU0rlglaOWFbZqmYFVzVxitNClkqyWitndUnKgkrmXGkZv0DvJt8h-LuTiwm6JlrXtqZ3_hShIFLmQosRfPsfePSn0I-3AeWUcMIE1SO1mCgbfIzB1TCEpjPhASiBc7IwJQtcAIMx2XFiNU2Erklg9k0cEhxSGiJUJhlo-tr_kXzYQ-WbsxEfH_qHUq0k0fJ84JvJ6BiTD497pdCM81HNJrWJyd0_qibcQiG5FFCsv8KPq898-317DTv-G2Jbne4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1310302519</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Controlling Forum-Shopping: The Impact of MacShannon v. Rockware Glass Ltd</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Schuz, Rhona</creator><creatorcontrib>Schuz, Rhona</creatorcontrib><description>Forum-shopping is now part of the English conflict of laws, yet it is often criticised for producing an unfair result for the defendant. There are however, means to control forum-shopping of which staying proceedings is the most effective. This article examines the House of Lords' decision in MacShannon V. Rockware Glass Ltd (1978) A.C. 795 as it radically altered the test for staying proceedings where England is not the most suitable forum.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0020-5893</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-6895</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/iclqaj/35.2.374</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Banks ; Comparative law ; CONFLICT OF LAWS ; Court orders ; COURT RULES AND PROCEDURE ; Defendants ; Foreign courts ; Forum non conveniens ; Injunctions ; International law ; JURISDICTION ; Plaintiffs ; Regulation ; Trials</subject><ispartof>The International and comparative law quarterly, 1986-04, Vol.35 (2), p.374-412</ispartof><rights>Copyright 1986 British Institute of International and Comparative Law</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c479t-9e6e930cb9cfa82888451de0c2dcdf2638f0e83167b872f98ec9b0b6172eebc23</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/759233$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/759233$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27846,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schuz, Rhona</creatorcontrib><title>Controlling Forum-Shopping: The Impact of MacShannon v. Rockware Glass Ltd</title><title>The International and comparative law quarterly</title><addtitle>ICLQ</addtitle><description>Forum-shopping is now part of the English conflict of laws, yet it is often criticised for producing an unfair result for the defendant. There are however, means to control forum-shopping of which staying proceedings is the most effective. This article examines the House of Lords' decision in MacShannon V. Rockware Glass Ltd (1978) A.C. 795 as it radically altered the test for staying proceedings where England is not the most suitable forum.</description><subject>Banks</subject><subject>Comparative law</subject><subject>CONFLICT OF LAWS</subject><subject>Court orders</subject><subject>COURT RULES AND PROCEDURE</subject><subject>Defendants</subject><subject>Foreign courts</subject><subject>Forum non conveniens</subject><subject>Injunctions</subject><subject>International law</subject><subject>JURISDICTION</subject><subject>Plaintiffs</subject><subject>Regulation</subject><subject>Trials</subject><issn>0020-5893</issn><issn>1471-6895</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1986</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkM2P0zAQxS0EEmXhzIGLJSRuaf0RxzY3VNGyqy6IbhESl5HjOG26SZy1Xdj970kJ7IHTaPR-82bmIfSakjklmi8a296Z44KLOZtzmT9BM5pLmhVKi6doRggjmVCaP0cvYjwSQgsuxAxdLX2fgm_bpt_jlQ-nLrs5-GEY2_d4d3D4shuMTdjX-NrYm4Ppe9_jn3O89fb2lwkOr1sTI96k6iV6Vps2uld_6wX6tvq4W37KNl_Wl8sPm8zmUqdMu8JpTmypbW0UU0rlglaOWFbZqmYFVzVxitNClkqyWitndUnKgkrmXGkZv0DvJt8h-LuTiwm6JlrXtqZ3_hShIFLmQosRfPsfePSn0I-3AeWUcMIE1SO1mCgbfIzB1TCEpjPhASiBc7IwJQtcAIMx2XFiNU2Erklg9k0cEhxSGiJUJhlo-tr_kXzYQ-WbsxEfH_qHUq0k0fJ84JvJ6BiTD497pdCM81HNJrWJyd0_qibcQiG5FFCsv8KPq898-317DTv-G2Jbne4</recordid><startdate>19860401</startdate><enddate>19860401</enddate><creator>Schuz, Rhona</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>British Institute of International and Comparative Law</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>HAWNG</scope><scope>HFIND</scope><scope>IOIBA</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7UB</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19860401</creationdate><title>Controlling Forum-Shopping: The Impact of MacShannon v. Rockware Glass Ltd</title><author>Schuz, Rhona</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c479t-9e6e930cb9cfa82888451de0c2dcdf2638f0e83167b872f98ec9b0b6172eebc23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1986</creationdate><topic>Banks</topic><topic>Comparative law</topic><topic>CONFLICT OF LAWS</topic><topic>Court orders</topic><topic>COURT RULES AND PROCEDURE</topic><topic>Defendants</topic><topic>Foreign courts</topic><topic>Forum non conveniens</topic><topic>Injunctions</topic><topic>International law</topic><topic>JURISDICTION</topic><topic>Plaintiffs</topic><topic>Regulation</topic><topic>Trials</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schuz, Rhona</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 13</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 16</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 29</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The International and comparative law quarterly</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schuz, Rhona</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Controlling Forum-Shopping: The Impact of MacShannon v. Rockware Glass Ltd</atitle><jtitle>The International and comparative law quarterly</jtitle><addtitle>ICLQ</addtitle><date>1986-04-01</date><risdate>1986</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>374</spage><epage>412</epage><pages>374-412</pages><issn>0020-5893</issn><eissn>1471-6895</eissn><abstract>Forum-shopping is now part of the English conflict of laws, yet it is often criticised for producing an unfair result for the defendant. There are however, means to control forum-shopping of which staying proceedings is the most effective. This article examines the House of Lords' decision in MacShannon V. Rockware Glass Ltd (1978) A.C. 795 as it radically altered the test for staying proceedings where England is not the most suitable forum.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/iclqaj/35.2.374</doi><tpages>39</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0020-5893
ispartof The International and comparative law quarterly, 1986-04, Vol.35 (2), p.374-412
issn 0020-5893
1471-6895
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1310302519
source Jstor Complete Legacy; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Periodicals Index Online; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete
subjects Banks
Comparative law
CONFLICT OF LAWS
Court orders
COURT RULES AND PROCEDURE
Defendants
Foreign courts
Forum non conveniens
Injunctions
International law
JURISDICTION
Plaintiffs
Regulation
Trials
title Controlling Forum-Shopping: The Impact of MacShannon v. Rockware Glass Ltd
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T02%3A23%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Controlling%20Forum-Shopping:%20The%20Impact%20of%20MacShannon%20v.%20Rockware%20Glass%20Ltd&rft.jtitle=The%20International%20and%20comparative%20law%20quarterly&rft.au=Schuz,%20Rhona&rft.date=1986-04-01&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=374&rft.epage=412&rft.pages=374-412&rft.issn=0020-5893&rft.eissn=1471-6895&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/iclqaj/35.2.374&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E759233%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1310302519&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_informt_id=10.3316/agispt.19870975&rft_jstor_id=759233&rfr_iscdi=true