Abstract
Different countries around the world have different and unique private international law rules governing jurisdiction. The determination of jurisdiction plays an integral role in the chain of private international law. It is usually the first step that can either build or break the case's litigation success. It also paves the way for other stages in international civil or commercial litigation. Each country has its own rules detailing how international civil and commercial cases should be heard and decided in line with various legal instruments and sources. However, the rules of jurisdiction in many countries were designed specifically for domestic and territorial matters with a limited focus on international cases.
The rise of globalisation and free movement of goods and services between countries has led to a continuous increase in international civil and commercial disputes. Natural and juristic persons who are residents of a specific country find themselves entering into contracts or being involved in delictual acts with those from other foreign countries. Such cases must in the end find a specific forum for dispute resolution. Generally, jurisdiction will not be an issue if there is a choice of court agreement or if there is an applicable international instrument governing jurisdiction. However, the choice of court agreement may be treated differently in many countries, and there is also no universally accepted international instrument governing jurisdiction to date.
Therefore, it has apparently become necessary to assess the different rules on jurisdiction in specific individual countries (especially two different jurisdictions) to better understand the circumstances under which the courts of the different countries will accept to hear and decide in international civil and commercial cases. This is crucial as the same rules will also determine whether the judgment of the adjudicating courts can be recognized and enforced in other countries.
This dissertation aims to assess the grounds or bases under which courts in India and South Africa will exercise jurisdiction in international civil and commercial cases. The dissertation further assesses the differences and similarities between the jurisdictional rules in India and South Africa. It also highlights how the rules of both countries can potentially be influenced by the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements (HCCH 2005 Choice of Court Convention), if they both become members of the Convention, leading to uniform jurisdiction rules in the two countries.