## Facts

- Andrew Owusu, a British national domiciled in the United Kingdom, rented a vacation villa in Jamaica from N.B. Jackson, also domiciled in the United Kingdom; the arrangement included access to a beach.
- While in Jamaica, Owusu suffered serious injuries after diving into the sea and striking a submerged object.
- Owusu sued Jackson in England for breach of contract relating to safety and sued several Jamaican property/operator companies in tort for unsafe beach conditions.
- The United Kingdom was a Contracting State to the 1968 Brussels Convention; Jamaica was not.
- Jackson sought a stay of the English proceedings under the English doctrine of forum non conveniens, arguing Jamaica was the more appropriate forum; similar objections were raised by the Jamaican defendants.
- The English Court of Appeal referred questions on interpretation of the Brussels Convention to the Court of Justice (Grand Chamber).

## Issues

1. Whether Brussels Convention Article 2 applies where both parties are domiciled in the same Contracting State and the dispute has connections with a non-Contracting State but not with another Contracting State.
2. If Article 2 applies, whether a court with Article 2 jurisdiction may stay proceedings under a domestic forum non conveniens doctrine in favor of a non-Contracting State forum.

## Decision

- The Court held that Article 2 applies even when the dispute’s foreign connections are solely with a non-Contracting State.
- The Court held that a court of a Contracting State with jurisdiction under Article 2 may not decline or stay that jurisdiction on forum non conveniens grounds in favor of a non-Contracting State.
- The Court reasoned that Article 2 jurisdiction is mandatory except for derogations expressly stated in the Convention, and a national discretionary stay would introduce an extra, non-textual exception.
- The Court emphasized that allowing forum non conveniens would undermine uniform application and predictability of jurisdiction rules across Contracting States.
- The case was to proceed in the referring court consistent with this interpretation, meaning the action against the UK-domiciled defendant could not be stayed on forum non conveniens grounds.

## Legal Principles

- Brussels Convention Article 2 (defendant’s domicile) applies even in “mixed” disputes involving one Contracting State and a non-Contracting State.
- Article 2 jurisdiction is mandatory and “unqualified” except as expressly provided by the Convention’s enumerated exceptions.
- A Contracting State court may not use domestic forum non conveniens doctrine to restrict or displace jurisdiction conferred by Article 2, including where the alternative forum is in a non-Contracting State.
- The Convention’s objectives of procedural certainty, foreseeability, and uniform jurisdictional rules preclude Member-by-Member discretionary variations in whether Article 2 jurisdiction is exercised.

## Conclusion

The Court confirmed that domicile-based jurisdiction under Article 2 applies notwithstanding third-state connections and cannot be defeated by a national forum non conveniens stay, preserving uniform and predictable jurisdictional rules within the Brussels Convention system.


Owusu v. Jackson, Case C-281/02, [2005] E.C.R. I-1383 (C.J. 2005)