Home Maxims & Terms Private International Law meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Private International Law

Private International Law legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2018 CLD 1282 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Loan facility availed outside Pakistan through a bank incorporated in PakistanDebtor residing in PakistanAppropriate forum for initiating proceeding for recovery of loanPrinciplesForum which had the most real and substantial connection with the lis must exercise jurisdiction over it

When the bank and debtor were present in Pakistan, then it was the courts in Pakistan which must assume jurisdiction.

2018 PLD 795 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Loan facility availed outside Pakistan through a bank incorporated in PakistanDebtor residing in PakistanAppropriate forum for initiating proceeding for recorvery of loanPrinciplesForum which had the most real and substantial connection with the lis must exercise jurisdiction over it

When the bank and debtor were present in Pakistan, then it was the courts in Pakistan which must assume jurisdiction.

2016 PLD 174 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Judgment passed by court in Pakistan without regard to the principles of Private International Law

Such judgment may not be considered to be conclusive by foreign courts for having usurped the jurisdiction of a foreign court, even if in substance the case was rightly decided (by the court in Pakistan).

2016 PLD 174 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Principles ofApplicable in Pakistan

Courts in Pakistan were bound to apply the principles of Private International Law wherever necessary.

2016 PLD 174 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
S. 5Cross-border successionPrivate International LawPrinciples'Lex domicilii' and 'lex situs'Moveable/immoveable property of deceased situated in foreign country (outside Pakistan)Deceased possessing nationality and domicile of foreign country

Since disputed property was situated in a foreign country and the deceased was also domiciled and a national of the said foreign country, thus, following the rules of lex domicilii' and lex situs, the laws of foreign country would apply and courts of foreign country would have jurisdiction over such property

Jurisdiction of courts in Pakistan over the subject-matter property would be barred.

2016 PLD 169 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Jurisdiction and choice of lawForum non conveniens, doctrine ofConnotationJurisdiction clause, Scope and reach ofLegal effect of valid jurisdiction clause

Principles.

2003 PLD 382 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Execution of decree passed by the Court in BritainForeign judgment, action onScope

Action on the basis of a foreign judgment could only be maintained if the defendant in the judgment was a resident or at least physically present in the foreign country at the time of commencement of proceedings or had submitted to or agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of such foreign Court

Mere fact that the cause of action had accrued within the jurisdiction of such Court would not confer competence upon such Court in an International, sense so as to make its judgment recognizable and enforceable

When the question of amenability of a non-resident foreigner to the jurisdiction of the Court of a particular country was involved the matter had to be examined from an International Law perspective.

2003 CLD 1797 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

International obligations to the State ought to be duly honoured.

1994 PLD 525 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Conflict of LawsPrinciples-Application-Contract-ArbitrationArbitration clause in a contract executed in Pakistan

-Jurisdiction of Courts in Pakistan to entertain proceedings in respect of arbitration conducted and award rendered by the arbitrator in a foreign country-

Principles of Private International Law are subject to the Municipal Laws of Pakistan

-Seat of arbitration has no relevance to determine the procedure for arbitration

Courts of Pakistan are bound to decide the question of jurisdiction in accordance with the law operating in Pakistan-

Jurisdiction vested in the Courts cannot be taken away even by express agreement of the parties

Arbitration agreement, even where Rules of. International Chamber of Commerce apply do not have the effect of depriving the Courts of their jurisdiction

-Provisions of Rules of International Chamber of Commerce are to be treated at par with provisions of arbitration within the country- -Arbitration Act (X of 1940), Ss.2(c), 30,, 33, 41 & 47

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.20-

Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act (VI of 1937), Preamble-

Contract Act (IX of 1872) Ss.23 & 28: -[Jurisdiction].

1980 SCMR 456 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Word "Domicile"-Acquisition-Pakistan Citizenship Act (II of 1951).It is a well-settled principle of Private International Law, to which reference is necessary, as "domicile" has not been defined in the Pakistan Citizenship Act, that every person carries the domicile of the country in which he is born; that so long as he does not intentionally and by the exercise of free volition choose the domicile of another country he carries the domicile of his origin ; and that to prove that he had acquired another domicile of his choice he must show that he had intentionally taken a decision in that behalf in the sense that he had taken abode therein with the intention making it his permanent residence.-[Words and phrases].

1979 CLC 48 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Administration of estate of deceasedDeceased at time of her death domiciled in a city in Pakistan

Law of country of domicile being applicable estate of deceased, held, to be administered rind distributed in accordance with Sunni Hanafi Muslim Law as in force in Pakistan. -[Muhammadan Law].

1969 PLD 109 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Private International Law -Choice of proper law-Law of land with whose legal system particular contract had closest and most substantial connection - Proper law applicable - Maxim: lex loci solutionis.

1968 PLD 520 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Private International Law Work of authority on subject consulted-[Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 57]-["Private International Law" by G. C. Cheshire, 6th Edn., p. 603.

1968 PLD 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Private International Law Bound to be part of Municipal Law to enable Courts of the country to administer it.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Private International Law", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/3308

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Private International Law"

MLD 2021
2021-March-25

2021 M L D 1559

AQIB JAVED and another — Petitioners Versus HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN and 7 others — Respondents

Court: Lahore (Multan Bench)
CLC 1998
Civil Appeal No. 46 of 1997, decided on 4th November, 1997.

1998 C L C 534

Miss SHAHIDA BANG‑‑‑Appellant Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

Court: Supreme Court (AJ&K)
PLD 2016
2015-December-16

P L D 2016 Supreme Court 174

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN (DECEASED) through L.Rs. and others — Appellants Versus NASREEN FIRDOUS and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 1994
Civil Revisions Nos.34 and 83 of 1994, decided on 29th June, 1994.

1994L87

Messrs RUPALI POLYESTER LTD: ‑‑Petitioner Versus Dr. NAEL G: BUNNI and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑‑‑ Conflict of Laws ‑‑‑Principles‑ ‑‑Application‑ ‑‑Contract‑ ‑‑Arbitration‑‑‑ Arbitration clause in a contract executed in Pakistan‑‑ ‑Jurisdiction of Courts in Pakistan to entertain proceedings in respect of arbitration conducted and award rendered by the arbitrator in a foreign country‑ ‑‑Principles of Private International Law are subject to the Municipal Laws of Pakistan‑‑ ‑Seat of arbitration has no relevance to determine the procedure for arbitration‑‑ Courts of Pakistan are bound to decide the question of jurisdiction in accordance with the law operating in Pakistan‑ ‑‑Jurisdiction vested in the Courts cannot be taken away even by express agreement of the parties‑‑ Arbitration agreement, even where Rules of. International Chamber of Commerce apply do not have the effect of depriving the Courts of their jurisdiction‑‑ ‑Provisions of Rules of International Chamber of Commerce are to be treated at par with provisions of arbitration within the country‑ ‑ Arbitration Act (X of 1940), Ss.2(c), 30,, 33, 41 & 47‑‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.20‑ ‑‑Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act (VI of 1937), Preamble‑ ‑‑Contract Act (IX of 1872) Ss.23 & 28: ‑Jurisdiction.
PLD 1998
1997-January-27

P L D 1998 Lahore 59

SHARIFAN and 6 others — Petitioners Versus THE FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN trough Secretary, Ministry of Interior and Narcotics Control, Interior Division, Islamabad — Respondent

Court: High Court
PLD 2019
2017-June-2

P L D 2019 Sindh 130

Succession Miscellaneous Application No.230 of 2016

Court: High Court
CLC 2001
Civil Appeal No:60 of 2000, decided on 30th March, 2001.

2001 C L C 1072

NASIR PERVAIZ ‑‑‑ Appellant Versus SHAZIA QAYYUM and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Supreme Ccourt (AJ&K)
PLD 1971
Letters Patent Appeal No. 25 of 1965, decided on 2nd November 1970.

P L D 1971 Karachi 314

THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA‑ — Appellant Versus MESSRS GAMMON‑LAYTON, KARACHI Respondent

Court: (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 86‑Provisions applicable to foreign Rulers and not to foreign States‑A. M. Quershi v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and another P L D 1968 Kar. 443 overruled.
PLD 1968
Civil Revision No. 492 of 1966, decided on 29th May 1967.

P L D 1968 Lahore 520

SAEED AHMAD‑Petitioner Versus MAHMOOD AHMAD‑Respondent

Court: (d) Private International Law‑-Work of authority on subject consulted‑Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 57‑"Private Inter national Law" by G. C. Cheshire, 6th Edn., p. 603.
CLC 1995
Civil Appeal No. 41 of 1995, decided on 16th July, 1995.

1995 C L C 1761

FOZIA HUSSAIN ABBASI‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE NOMINATION BOARD through Chairman and 4 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: SC (AJ&K)