Our articles are written by experts in their field and include individual barristers, solicitors, academics, judges, and leading firms in relevant areas of practice. JIBFL offers authoritative insights into global banking and financial law, providing essential updates for legal practitioners and policymakers. Covering key topics like lending, security interests, derivatives, debt capital markets, banking and finance related disputes, crypto, FinTech and financial regulation, JIBFL serves as a trusted resource for navigating complex legal challenges and staying informed in the financial sector. If you would like to contribute, please email Amanda.Cohen2@lexisnexis.com.
Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses: when will they be effective?
© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All rights reserved.
Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses (also known as unilateral or one-way clauses) allow one party greater choice than the other as to the courts in which proceedings can be brought if a dispute arises under the agreement. Such clauses are often used in finance agreements, where they typically require an obligor to bring claims in a named jurisdiction, but permit the finance parties to sue in any competent court. This gives the finance parties flexibility to choose an appropriate jurisdiction once a dispute arises depending on where the counterparty may have assets at that time.
If you are already a User, sign in
Or you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Alternatively you can subscribe here to read unlimited content.
