Question whether Court should exercise jurisdiction over Kenyan Company


Re: AAA & Ors v Unilever PLC & Anor [2017] EWHC 371 (QB)

D1 was a holding company registered in the UK, and D2 was registered in Kenya and operated the plantation where the claimants were subject to ethnic violence. The application sought a stay on the grounds that the Court should not exercise any jurisdiction it may have over D2, and that the order giving permission for the claimants to serve the claim should be set aside. The Court: refused the applications to stay on grounds that they required the court to adjudicate on foreign acts of state, and on case management. Nonetheless, the Court set aside service on D2 on the grounds that there was no real issue between claimants and D1 and that the claim against D2 did not have reasonable prospect of success.

Richard Hermer QC and Guy Vassall-Adams QC were involved in this case.