Abstract Common law courts will enforce jurisdiction agreements unless they find ‘strong cause’ or ‘strong reasons’ not to. This article argues that the strong cause test is the product of the fact that jurisdiction agreements should generally be viewed as weighty factors under forum non conveniens. In particular, this is because a jurisdiction agreement reflects parties’ well-informed view that their chosen court is the appropriate forum for their dispute, to be departed from only in exceptional circumstances. This account explains various features of the strong cause test which otherwise prove difficult to rationalise, and also holds implications for the law’s treatment of non-exclusive jurisdiction agreements and contractual anti-suit injunctions.
Marcus Teo (Mon,) studied this question.