Scripsit Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 07:31:39PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
>> The difference is that if you have accepted a choice-of-venue license, >> the sociopath can present his local venue with proof that it has >> jurisdisction. That makes a difference, however much you try to deny it. > If it's a frivolous case, it makes no difference. You'll have to turn up > to either: > > (a) debunk the claim that there is jurisdiction, or I think that most sane courts (I assume the nominated venue is sane) will of its own accord verify that it has jurisdiction before it schedules a case. If there is no evidence for jurisdiction in the case, the defendant will never even hear of the suit. -- Henning Makholm "Man vælger jo selv sine forbilleder."
