| Return to Contents Solvalub Strikes Again Paul Matthews At the risk of boring readers who have hh of extra-territorial Mareva injunctions [1] we should record that the Bahamas is the latest jurisdiction to fall under the seductive spell of the Jersey Court of Appeal. In Grupo Torres SA v Mees Pierson (Bahamd. and others [2]the plaintiff sought a Mareva injunction and disclosure order against the defendants from the Bahamian Supreme Court. The report does not state where the defendants were based, but the name of the first defendant suggests that it is a Bahamian registered corporation. The judgment in fact states that the court had territorial jurisdiction over the defendants. But it was common ground that there was no substantive cause of action in The Bahamas: the injunction and order were sought in aid of legal proceedings elsewhere. The question accordingly was whether the Bahamian court was competent to grant a Mareva injunction against a defendant within its territorial jurisdiction where there was no cause of action there. This is so-called "power" jurisdiction, in the sense in which that phrase is used in Mercedes-Benz Aduck. [3] Sawyer CJ cited Castanho v Brown & RK) Ltd [4]and Solvalub Ltd. v Match Invests Ltd. [5]and held that "it is at least arguable that this court has jurisdiction to grant a Mareva injunction even where no substantive cause of action is, or could be, pleaded, in support of foreign proceedings … particularly where, as here … the ownership of the defendants and their assets is a matter to be decided according to the laws of The Bahamas." It will be noted that the judge only decided that the point was arguable, not that it was definitely so. The reason for the caution is not clear. If the application were ex parte, then any decision would be subject to an application to discharge, so the judge might express herself cautiously for that reason. But from the report it seems that the defendants took part in the hearing, and indeed cited Thina [6]in support of a submission that the court had no jurisdiction to grant the relief sought. Further Jersey caselaw on the territorial jurisdiction to areva injunctions is discussed elsewhere in this issue of the Review [7]. Paul Matthews is a solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales and a consultant with the firm of Withers, 12, Gough Square, London EC4A 3DE |