In its decision in Kwok v UBS handed down today ([2023] EWCA Civ 222), the Court of Appeal (Lord Burnett of Maldon LCJ, Sir Geoffrey Vos MR and Carr LJ) unanimously dismissed UBS’s appeal against Cockerill J’s judgment holding that UBS could be sued in England pursuant to the 2007 Lugano Convention.
In his judgment, the Master of the Rolls gave guidance as to the application of both Article 5.3 (place of event giving rise to the harm) and Article 5.5 (claims arising out of operations of a branch) in cases of pure economic loss. His Lordship concluded that it was “clear” that Cockerill J was correct to find that the key test under Article 5.3 is to identify the place where the damage ‘manifested’ itself and it was dangerous to attempt to refine this test further. He considered that her application of the principles in finding the damage occurred in London was “the only one that could have sensibly been reached”. He further agreed with Cockerill J’s conclusion that the essential parts of the claims arose out of the actions of UBS’s London branch and therefore fell within Article 5.5.
Sa’ad Hossain KC, Sebastian Isaac KC and Matthew Hoyle act for the Second Claimant, instructed by Harcus Parker.
View Judgment