A recent High Court decision involved consideration of whether
the court properly had jurisdiction to hear a case based on the
principles of the EU Brussels I Regulation (44/2001). While the
decision does not establish any novel principle, it is a useful
restatement of a generally understood position.
Background
In Coleman v Offley Insurance Services Limited(1) the
defendant, an insurance broking firm registered in the United
Kingdom, brought a motion seeking an order to set aside service of
proceedings and/or to strike out the summons on the basis that the
Irish court did not have jurisdiction to hear and determine the
plaintiffs' claims under the Brussels I Regulation. In the
summons, the plaintiffs sought damages for "breach of
contract, negligence, breach of duty (including breach of statutory
duty and breach of fiduciary duty)" and "a declaration
that [they] are entitled to an indemnity from the
defendant".
