Owusu v. Jackson
Citation and Court
Case C-281/02, [2005] ECR I-1383 (Court of Justice of the European Union)
Facts
Mr. Owusu, a British national, was injured in Jamaica while using a holiday beach through an arrangement involving Mr. Jackson, a defendant domiciled in England. Jackson argued that Jamaica was a more convenient forum and sought to have the English proceedings stayed on forum non conveniens grounds under English common law.
Issue
Whether a court of an EU Member State is obliged under the Brussels Convention to exercise jurisdiction conferred by Article 2 (domicile of the defendant) even when a non-Member State court might be a more appropriate forum under the doctrine of forum non conveniens.
Holding
A court of a Member State may not decline jurisdiction conferred by Article 2 of the Brussels Convention (now Brussels I Regulation) on forum non conveniens grounds, even where the alternative forum is a non-Member State.
Rule / Doctrine
The Brussels Regulation’s mandatory jurisdiction rules are incompatible with the discretionary forum non conveniens doctrine. When an EU regulation confers jurisdiction, that jurisdiction must be exercised; Member State courts cannot stay proceedings in favor of a non-EU forum based on convenience.
Significance
Owusu effectively abolished forum non conveniens in EU civil litigation when jurisdiction derives from Brussels I, requiring EU courts to hear cases even when non-EU jurisdictions would be more convenient. This makes the EU a more plaintiff-friendly venue compared to the U.S. and UK, and distinguishes it sharply from the approach in U.S. courts.