[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Why is choice of venue non-free ?

On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 06:16:06 -0800, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 01:50:16PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:

> > I'm not convinced that the advantage to the copyright holder is small.
> > If a large US corporation violates my copyright license, I'm likely to
> > stand a significantly better chance if I can sue them in the UK.
> Is there a reason you can't sue them in the UK without a choice of venue
> clause?

In general, venue is decided by statute, which will normally  require
that the lawsuit be filed where the defendant resides, has a place of
business, conducts business, or has a registered corporate office. If
none of the defendants live or do business in the jurisdiction where
the plaintiff seeks to issue the proceedings, statutes normally then
look to where the plaintiff resides, does business, or has a
registered corporate office.

There can also be specialized rules, such as statutes which requires a
lawsuit to recover tangible personal property to be filed in the
jurisdiction where the property is located.

Choice of venue clauses are not always enforceable, as they may
conflict with a court's native jurisdiction's laws on fairness or



Reply to: