- Followed — Alexander Gorbachev v Andrey Grigoryevich Guriev 2022-09-30
“…d as ‘exorbitant’. But following the globalisation (and digitalisation) of the world economy that attitude can now be seen as out of date. In Abela v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44, [2013] 1 WLR 2043, for example, Lord Sumption (with whom the other justices agreed on this point) said at [53]:…”
- Cited — The Good Law Project (R on the application of) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care 2022-03-24
“…relevant principles have been well-travelled in the authorities, with the decision in Barton, endorsing the earlier Supreme Court decision in Abela v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44; [2013] 1 WLR 2043, at the helm. What constitutes “good reason” is essentially a matter of factual evaluation; over-analysis and copious citation of authority …”
- Cited — Sutton v Norwich City Council 2021-01-13
“…ch the Court of Appeal might or would have adopted, but has exceeded the generous ambit within which reasonable disagreement is possible”. In Abela v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44, [2013] 1 WLR 2043, Lord Clarke spoke at paragraph 23 of an appellate Court interfering with a value judgment based on the evaluation of a number of different …”
- Cited — Huawei Technologies Co, Ltd v Conversant Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. 2019-01-30
“… to take a more pragmatic approach to the question of service out, relying on the observations of Lord Sumption JSC in Abela and others v Baadarani and another [2013] UKSC 44; [2013] 1 WLR 2043 at [53].…”
- Doubted — Kaefer Aislamientos SA De CV v AMS Drilling Mexico SA De CV & Ors 2019-01-17
“…(Comm) at paragraph [41] and Trust Risk Group SpA v AmTrust Europe Ltd [2015] EWH Civ 437 at paragraph [41]. This logic was however doubted in Abela v Baardani [2013] UKSC 44 (“Abela”) at paragraphs [44] and [53] per Lord Clarke and Lord Sumption, with whom the remainder of the Supreme Court agreed, as unrealistic in the modern era:…”
- Cited — Vik v Deutsche Bank AG 2018-09-06
“… Court within proper bounds – especially where individual liberty is at risk – even having regard to the observations of Lord Sumption JSC in Abela v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44; [2013] 1 WLR 2043, esp. at [53]. That said, I see no sign of any “exorbitant” jurisdiction being exercised in this case, keeping well in mind the indisputable…”
- Cited — Eurasia Sports Ltd v Aguad 2018-07-24
“…7 in my Lord’s judgment and again referred to in paragraph 48 should now be read in the context of Lord Sumption’s comment in paragraph 53 of Abela v Baadarani [2013] UKSC 44; [2013] 1 WLR 2043 to the effect that litigation between residents of different states is a routine incident of modern commercial life and any decision in rela…”
- Followed — Orexim Trading Ltd v Mahavir Port And Terminal Private Ltd & Ano 2018-07-13
“…d as “exorbitant”. But following the globalisation (and digitalisation) of the world economy that attitude can now be seen as out of date. In Abela v Bardarini [2013] UKSC 44, [2013] 1 WLR 2043, for example, Lord Sumption (with whom the other justices agreed on this point) said at [53]…”