Abstract This article examines the validity, scope, and effects of the jurisdiction clauses commonly contained in International Swaps and Derivatives Association (‘ISDA’) Master Agreements, particularly in light of the guidance provided in Dexia SA v Comune di Torino (‘Torino’) in relation to the 1992 Master Agreement. The article contextualizes Torino within the broader line of English and Italian case law on OTC derivatives, draws inferences for other iterations of the ISDA jurisdiction clause, and considers the practical implications of Torino affirming the exclusive jurisdiction of English courts over English-law-governed ISDA derivatives. It further engages with the key issue left open by Torino—that is, whether the 1992 ISDA jurisdiction clause is capable of benefiting from the 2005 Hague Convention. It argues that it is.
Nicolò A Gaggero (Thu,) studied this question.