Lorraine Higgins (Labour) | Oireachtas source

As has been outlined already, the purpose of the Bill is to make provision for the measures that are required to ensure that the Hague Convention of 30 June 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements can function effectively within the Irish legal system. The convention comes into force on 1 October this year and Irish legislation will have to be updated to reflect this.

It is important to be clear. The convention we are discussing is designed to facilitate choice of court agreements between commercial parties. While such a framework already exists within the EU, no corresponding agreement exists internationally unless we consider the likes of arbitration, which is an alternative dispute resolution mechanism. Therefore, while such court agreements are abided by within the EU, internationally their application is far more difficult. As I understand it, the proposed convention would provide the necessary legal framework to remedy this situation.

Similar to many provisions in arbitration agreements, choice of court agreements usually stipulate that the court of a specific state has the jurisdiction to hear cases based on the contract that exists between the parties. These types of agreements are generally seen as advantageous for commercial purposes, as outlined already by previous speakers, as they are designed to facilitate uniform trading across borders. The extent to which this arrangement works well is reliant on how assured parties are that their contract will be upheld by a court in the advent of legal proceedings. This is in reference to both the court requested being able to hear the case and in respect of other courts being obliged to acknowledge and enforce any judgment handed down by the choice of court agreement as well.

However, I am compelled to wonder what the downsides might be in allowing companies to cherry-pick which jurisdictions and which courts to oversee their disputes. In such a context, I wonder about national legal mechanisms being bound by the rulings of international commercial courts, such as the newly-convened institution in Singapore. I have reservations on the effect or status of our national courts and perhaps our competitiveness, particularly from an arbitration viewpoint given that many hearings take place in this country and this area has been successful in recent years. If we can replicate the success of the international arbitration hearings held in Dublin it would be fantastic. Senator Conway has alluded to the reality and the need for a legal area akin to the IFSC in this country in order that we can make the most of our competitive standing. He also referenced the facts that we have enviable legal infrastructure already in place, we are English speaking, we are from a common law jurisdiction, we are on the edge of Europe and we are a member of the European Union.

While I appreciate that time, a competent legal infrastructure - something we already have in Ireland - and flexibility are significant issues that companies always consider, it is likely that these are among the factors that have attracted many companies to locate in Ireland in the first place. We need to ensure that situations do not arise whereby big businesses shirk their legal responsibilities to the State and the people by sidestepping any laws in favour of another jurisdiction. I call on the House to consider this on the next Stage.