Maharanee of Baroda v Wildenstein
HRH the Maharanee of Baroda v Wildenstein, was a decision of the English Court of Appeal relating to the conflict of laws, and specifically whether the English courts should take jurisdiction in relation to a claim which had no substantial connections with England on the basis that the defendant was served with proceedings during a brief visit to the country. However the principle established by the case that presence within the jurisdiction is not negated only because it is a short or transient presence remains good law.
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
primaryTopic
Maharanee of Baroda v Wildenstein
HRH the Maharanee of Baroda v Wildenstein, was a decision of the English Court of Appeal relating to the conflict of laws, and specifically whether the English courts should take jurisdiction in relation to a claim which had no substantial connections with England on the basis that the defendant was served with proceedings during a brief visit to the country. However the principle established by the case that presence within the jurisdiction is not negated only because it is a short or transient presence remains good law.
has abstract
HRH the Maharanee of Baroda v ...... ent presence remains good law.
@en
Wikipage page ID
52,847,984
page length (characters) of wiki page
Wikipage revision ID
959,575,615
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
caption
The French master, François Boucher
@en
citations
[1972] 2 All ER 689
@en
[1972] 2 QB 283
@en
[1972] 2 WLR 1077
@en
date decided
1972-03-09
full name
H.R.H. Maharanee Sethadevi Gaekwar of Baroda v Daniel Wildenstein
@en
keywords
forum non conveniens
@en
name
Maharanee of Baroda v Wildenstein
@en
number of judges
wikiPageUsesTemplate
comment
HRH the Maharanee of Baroda v ...... ent presence remains good law.
@en
label
Maharanee of Baroda v Wildenstein
@en