Hague Convention. The Hague Convention certainly applies only to unique59 exclusive agreements60 which select the courts of one country. An agreement which nominates the courts of more than one country as having “exclusive” jurisdiction is not exclusive under the Hague Convention. This leaves the effect of non-unique choice of court agreements to be resolved by the otherwise applicable regime.61 An agreement which nominates more than one court of the same country falls within the definition of an “exclusive” agreement under the Hague Convention. The national law of that country determines which of several selected national courts should have jurisdiction. 62 Both types of non-unique clause would therefore be effective under the Hague Convention, but only if both courts are in the same country.63
Hague Convention. Article 1(a) of the Hague Convention546 makes it an offence punishable under Article 2 by “severe penalties” where any person on board an aircraft in flight: “unlawfully, by force or threat thereof, or by any other form of intimidation, seizes, or exercises control of, that aircraft, or attempts to perform such act…”547 One point worth perhaps just noting is that a Contracting State must establish its jurisdiction over offences covered by the Convention not only when the aircraft in question is registered in such state548 or located within its territory549 but also: “when the offence is committed on board an aircraft leased without crew to a lessee who has his principal place of business or, if the lessee has no such place of business, his permanent residence, in that State.”550 Nevertheless, it is submitted that, apart from this provision, as with the Tokyo Convention, the Hague Convention has little or no applicability to the lessor-lessee relationship.
Hague Convention. (i) At the time of its entry into the governing law provisions of any agreement between Counterparty and any securities intermediary governing the Collateral Account (each such agreement, an “Account Agreement”) that are currently in force and at each time of any later EXECUTION amendment to any Account Agreement that reaffirmed such governing law provisions, any securities intermediary had an office located in the United States of America that was not a temporary office and that engaged in a business or other regular activity of maintaining securities accounts within the meaning of Article 4(1)(a) of the Hague Securities Convention.
Hague Convention. (i) At the time of the Securities Intermediary’s entry into the governing law provisions of any agreement between the Issuer and the Securities Intermediary governing the Trust Accounts (each such agreement, an “Account Agreement”) that are currently in force, (ii) at each time of any later amendment to any Account Agreement that reaffirmed or amended such governing law provisions, and (iii) as of the date hereof: the Securities Intermediary had and has an office located in the United States of America, that is not a temporary office, and that engaged and engages in a business or other regular activity of maintaining securities accounts within the meaning of Article 4(1)(a)(iii) of the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Certain Rights in Respect of Securities Held With an Intermediary.
Hague Convention. The parties hereby consent to service of process in any Dispute that is in accordance with the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Discloser has the unrestricted right at any time to seek a court injunction or similar relief prohibiting Receiver from making unauthorized disclosure or use of Discloser’s Confidential Information. The prevailing party in any dispute shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys fees and costs.
Hague Convention. IF A PARTY TO THIS AGREEMENT INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE NETHERLANDS IS REPRESENTED BY AN ATTORNEY-IN-FACT OR ATTORNEYS-IN-FACT IN CONNECTION WITH THE EXECUTION OF THIS AGREEMENT, OR ANY OTHER AGREEMENT OR DOCUMENT PURSUANT HERETO AND THE RELEVANT POWER OF ATTORNEY IS EXPRESSED TO BE GOVERNED BY DUTCH LAW, SUCH CHOICE OF LAW IS HEREBY ACCEPTED BY THE OTHER PARTY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 14 OF THE HAGUE CONVENTION ON THE LAW APPLICABLE TO AGENCY OF 14 MARCH 1978. 11.15 Waiver of Jury Trial. EACH PARTY HERETO HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LEGAL PROCEEDING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY OR THEREBY (WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT OR ANY OTHER THEORY). EACH PARTY HERETO (A) CERTIFIES THAT NO REPRESENTATIVE, AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PERSON HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PERSON WOULD NOT, IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER AND (B) ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT AND THE OTHER PARTIES HERETO HAVE BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION. 11.16
