Introduction: This paper endeavours to check the standard English law and the European Group (EC) law on jurisdictional values, in that, it seeks to understand and elucidate why the previous set of jurisdictional rules value flexibility and justice whereas the latter values certainty and predictability vis-à-vis the other. The EC law offers priority to the first goal of harmonizing the laws on jurisdiction within the territory of its member states and subsequently makes it mandatory to uphold the strict accuracy to its precept while giving secondary standing to the target of justice for the events.
That is the first level to be determined; and secondly, if it was so laid down, has it passed right into a binding rule of law ?—that is, has it been so recognised and handled by subsequent Judges as to forestall a Judge of a tribunal of co-ordinate jurisdiction from saying that the choice is contrary to the course of law, and isn’t binding upon him.
There isn’t a jewel in the world akin to studying; no studying so glorious both for Prince and subject, as knowledge of laws; and no information of any laws (I converse of human) so necessary for all estates and for all causes, concerning goods, lands or life, as the widespread laws of England.
B. Jurisdiction underneath the EC Law: Aside from sure cases where the applicability of the EC law on jurisdiction doesn’t depend upon the defendants domicile (Art.22 Exclusive Jurisdiction and Art.23 Prorogation of Jurisdiction) the EC law on jurisdiction rests on the domicile of the defendant, and makes it necessary for the court of a member state to determine the jurisdictional issues and different issues where the defendant is domiciled in its jurisdiction.
A thoughts that’s expert in evaluation is good at slicing and dicing issues – breaking problems down into pieces that may have rules or arguments applied to them (see my article on law school preparation for the reasoning abilities generally applied in law faculty).