The High Court set aside an ex parte order permitting service out of the jurisdiction in proceedings seeking recognition and enforcement in Ireland of a multi-billion dollar US judgment against a sovereign state in connection with the nationalisation of an oil and gas company. The court found no connection with Ireland, no evidence of assets in or likely to come into the jurisdiction, and no practical benefit to the plaintiffs in litigating in Ireland. It further held that procedural facilities available in Ireland were already accessible in the United States and other jurisdictions where enforcement was also being pursued. Although issues of sovereign immunity and act of state doctrine were raised, the court considered that these should be decided at a substantive hearing if enforcement were permitted, but nonetheless saw no basis to establish jurisdiction at this preliminary stage. Even if the court had allowed service out, it would have imposed a limited stay pending the outcome of the ongoing US appeal, due to the risk of inconsistent outcomes and significant cost. The judgment emphasises the need for solid practical benefit and a real connection to Ireland for enforcement of foreign judgments.
Service out of jurisdiction – recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments – practical benefit – sovereign immunity – act of state doctrine – US judgment – nationalisation – minority shareholders – Rules of the Superior Courts (RSC) – comparative cost and convenience – public policy exception – international law – liquidation – judicial discretion – Brussels (recast)