English Courts Address the Potential Convergence between the Doctrines of Piercing the Corporate Veil, Party Autonomy in Jurisdiction Agreements and Privity of Contract

Examines case law on whether the courts could pierce the corporate veil in order to enforce a contractual jurisdiction clause against the controller of a company pursuant to Regulation 44/2001 (Brussels I Regulation) art.23, despite this party not having been privy to the contract. Comments on two issues addressed in the jurisprudence: (1) the use of the agent-principal relationship as an analogy for the relationship between a company and its controller; and (2) the argument that the controller may be deemed to have consented to the jurisdiction agreement.