According to the Court of Appeal, the contract expressed the intention of the parties to seize to the Quebec courts of any disputes that related to the interpretation and application of the contract. [...] The duty of the court seized that is not the court chosen by the parties [21] In Quebec law, prior to 1994, when the parties chose a foreign court, this choice was never considered to be exclusive and the Quebec courts retained jurisdiction.[38] Since 1994, it has been possible for the parties to exclude the jurisdiction of the Quebec courts but, the language of the clause must be clear. [...] [23] Article 6 of the Convention sets out five express exceptions to the duty of a court that is not chosen to decline jurisdiction: a) the agreement is null and void under the law of the State of the chosen court, including its conflict of laws rules; b) a party lacked the capacity to conclude the . [...] Article 9 b) of the Convention provides cumulatively for the application of the rules of the requested court to govern the capacity of the parties to conclude the agreement. [...] Indeed, the duty of the court chosen by the parties to hear the case, that of the court seized but not chosen by the parties to stay proceedings and that of the court asked to recognize and enforce the judgment given by the chosen court are found in both the Convention and Quebec law.
- Pages
- 32
- Published in
- Canada
