Bahrain Sheikh’s desire to meet Bollywood stars

In an interesting case between one Sheikh Hamad Isa Ali Al Khalifa, who is a member of Bahrain Royal Family, and a businessman Ahmed Adel Abdallah Ahmed (the claimant), the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court of Justice, has ruled that the dispute can be tried in English courts..The judgment was delivered by Sir Jeremy Cooke..Stephen Nathan QC and Duncan Macpherson represented the claimant. They were instructed by Zaiwalla & Co. Andrew Lenon QC represented Sheikh Hamad Isa Ali Al Khalifa. Lenon was instructed by Simmons Gleek..The claimant is suing Sheikh Hamad for breach of contract. The claimant and Sheikh Hamad had entered into an oral agreement, where in the claimant was to arrange meeting with 26 Bollywood film stars for Sheikh Hamad. Pursuant to this agreement, Sheikh Hamad met four film stars, Salman Khan, Shah Rukh Khan, Ranveer Singh and Aditya Roy Kapoor..It is the claimant’s case that after 5 meetings with 4 film stars (arranged by the claimants), which took place in Mumbai and Dubai, and payment of some $3.0m-$3.4m, Sheikh Hamad breached the agreement. Sheikh Hamad refused to pay the amount agreed for the remaining meetings and found excuses not to meet with two other stars when arrangements had already been made..It is also the claimant’s submission that Sheikh Hamad found another person to introduce him to thirteen Bollywood film stars (including in London) and breached the exclusive arrangement with the claimant, thus depriving the claimant of the money it would have made in arranging meetings with the other twenty-two stars on the list..The case before the High Court was limited to the aspect of jurisdiction – whether the matter should be tried in English court. When the claim was filed by the claimant in England, Sheikh Hamad challenged the jurisdiction of the English Court as he wished for the case to be decided in Bahrain. The question that arose for determination was whether there was a real risk that the claimant might not get a fair trial in Bahrain by reason of the fact that Sheikh Hamad is a member of the Royal family..The Court held that the case is one in which connections to England and Bahrain are limited. But because service was effected within the English jurisdiction, the onus is on the defendant to show that Bahrain is a more appropriate forum..Though the Court held there would be no real injustice caused if the case was tried in Bahrain and that the claimant has made an effort to downplay the connections of the case with Bahrain, it would still not suffice to make out the case of the defendant that Bahrain is a more appropriate forum..“I do not find that there is any real risk of injustice, were I to take the view that the courts of Bahrain represent clearly the most appropriate forum for the determination of the dispute in the interest of both the parties and the ends of justice…..This is a case where the connections both to England and Bahrain are limited and, because service was effected as of right, within this jurisdiction, the onus is on the Defendant to show that Bahrain is clearly and distinctly the more appropriate forum. That, in my judgment, he cannot do. Whilst the Claimants exaggerate the connections with England and have apparently taken steps since the events in question to increase connections here and reduce them in Bahrain, whilst downplaying the connections with that jurisdiction in the shape of the Defendant’s domicile and the location of the initial conversations which formed part of the alleged contract, none of the factors which connect the case to Bahrain make it clearly the more appropriate forum. In these circumstances, the proceedings ought to be permitted to continue here, without a stay in favour of proceedings to be pursued in the Courts of Bahrain.”.It, therefore, allowed the case to be pursued in England..Read the judgment below.