| Nudd v Taylor | |
| Court: | Supreme Court of Queensland |
| Date Decided: | 30 August 2000 |
| Full Name: | Nudd v Taylor |
| Citations: | [2000] QSC 344]| judges=Holmes J| prior actions=| subsequent actions=| opinions= |
Nudd v Taylor,[1]
Holmes J in determining whether there could be an exception to the Moçambique rule applied in regard to the counterclaim, stated:
Holmes J in determining that a foreign litigant had submitted himself to this jurisdiction stated:
That case was cited with approval by the New South Wales Court of Appeal in Marlborough Harbour Board v Charter Travel Co Ltd.[1] In the latter case, the court was prepared to go somewhat further, deciding that the foreign plaintiff's submission to the jurisdiction extended to a counterclaim which raised a new cause of action, provided that such a cross-claim was founded on or directly arose out of the same subject matter as that of the action.
To similar effect, the English Court of Appeal in Republic of Liberia v Gulf Oceanic Inc[2] concluded that a plaintiff submitted himself to the incidents of his litigation, including liability to a counterclaim properly brought. In that case the plaintiffs had sought a declaration in relation to a contract for the purchase of oil and a resulting arbitration. The defendant's counterclaim for damages for breach of the same contract and tort for wrongful procuring of the breach was permitted to stand, notwithstanding that the foreign defendants could not, in the absence of their own litigation, have been made amenable to the jurisdiction of the court on such an action.