Can You Sue a Foreign Company in England? A Practical Guide for International Businesses

Cross-border trade has never been more common. A software company in California supplies services to a business in London. A Dubai investor enters into a joint venture with a UK property developer. A Singapore company purchases manufacturing equipment from a supplier based in England.

When those relationships break down, one of the first questions is:

Where should proceedings be brought?

Many international businesses are surprised to discover that the English courts can hear disputes involving foreign companies even where neither party is based in England.

In the modern commercial world, contracts, money flows, assets and business operations frequently cross several jurisdictions. Understanding whether a dispute can be pursued in England is therefore often one of the most important early strategic decisions.

The Question Clients Ask Most Often

Clients rarely ask:

“Does the English court have jurisdiction pursuant to the relevant gateway?”

Instead, they ask:

“Can I sue this company in England?”

The answer depends upon a variety of factors, including:

• The terms of the contract.
• Where the parties are based.
• Where relevant events occurred.
• Whether English law applies.
• Whether assets are located in England.
• Whether the dispute concerns fraud, contracts, directors, shareholders, or property.

Importantly, a company does not necessarily need to have an office in England before the English courts can hear a claim against it.

The real question is whether there is a sufficient connection between the dispute and England and Wales.

When the English Courts Can Hear International Disputes

Many international disputes reach the English courts because there is a recognised jurisdictional basis. The most common basis is a contractual jurisdiction clause.

Many international contracts contain wording stating that disputes must be resolved in the courts of England and Wales. Where parties have agreed to litigate in England, the courts will generally seek to uphold that agreement. For that reason alone, many businesses choose English jurisdiction clauses when negotiating substantial commercial contracts.

If the defendant company is incorporated in England or otherwise based here, the English courts will usually be able to hear the claim.

Jurisdiction may also arise where:

• A contract was negotiated in England.
• Significant performance occurred in England.
• Payment was made through England.
• The dispute concerns English assets.

Fraud and Misrepresentation

England frequently becomes involved in fraud cases where:

• Funds passed through English bank accounts.
• Misrepresentations were made from England.
• Key individuals are based here.
• Recoverable assets are located here.

There are good reasons why parties often choose England as the forum for resolving complex commercial disputes.

Commercial Expertise

The English courts regularly deal with:

• High-value commercial disputes.
• International trade claims.
• Banking disputes.
• Shareholder disagreements.
• Fraud and asset recovery litigation.

Judges are accustomed to handling complicated cross-border matters involving substantial documentary evidence and multiple jurisdictions.

Interim Remedies

The English courts possess powerful tools including:

• Freezing injunctions.
• Search orders.
• Disclosure orders.
• Asset preservation remedies.

These remedies can be particularly important where there is a risk that assets will disappear before trial. Read more about our guide to freezing injunctions. 

Enforcement Advantages

Although every jurisdiction has its own rules, English judgments continue to carry significant weight internationally and can often be recognised abroad through local enforcement procedures.

One of the more interesting aspects of international litigation is that parties often choose England even where neither company is English. This frequently occurs in industries such as international trade, shipping, finance, technology and professional services.

English law is widely understood by commercial parties around the world. Many multinational businesses are familiar with English legal principles and prefer the certainty that comes from a mature and predictable legal system. English judges are accustomed to dealing with high-value international disputes. The Business and Property Courts regularly hear matters involving parties, assets and evidence located across multiple jurisdictions. The English courts have a reputation for dealing robustly with matters involving fraud, dishonesty and asset dissipation. The availability of freezing injunctions, disclosure orders and other interim remedies can provide significant protection to businesses that suspect assets may disappear before judgment is obtained.

For international businesses, litigation is rarely just about proving a legal right. It is about obtaining a practical result. In many cases, parties choose England because they believe the English courts offer the best opportunity to secure an effective commercial outcome.

This is particularly common where significant assets are located in England, where contractual arrangements are governed by English law, or where one of the parties believes urgent interim relief may become necessary.

Common Types of International Disputes Heard in England

International Contract Disputes

These frequently involve:

• Supply agreements.
• Distribution arrangements.
• Agency contracts.
• Technology agreements.
• International sale of goods disputes.

Shareholder Disputes

Foreign investors often hold interests in English companies. This can result in disputes concerning:

• Minority shareholder rights.
• Shareholder agreements.
• Director conduct.
• Business valuations.

Read more about our guide to shareholder and partnership disputes, here. 

Joint Venture Disputes

Cross-border joint ventures regularly generate disputes concerning governance, management, and exit rights.

Fraud Claims

Fraud cases are particularly common where funds or assets have passed through England.

Read more about fraud and dishonesty claims.

Asset Recovery Claims

International businesses frequently use the English courts to assist with tracing and recovering assets.

Practical Example: Dubai Business v English Supplier

A Dubai retailer enters into a long-term supply agreement with an English manufacturer. The agreement contains an exclusive English jurisdiction clause. The supplier repeatedly fails to deliver goods on time, causing substantial losses. The Dubai company wishes to recover damages.

Although the claimant is based in Dubai, the claim can still be pursued in England because:

• The contract contains an English jurisdiction clause.
• The defendant is based in England.
• Relevant evidence is located in England.

In many circumstances, England would be the natural forum for resolving the dispute.

Practical Example: International Fraud Across Multiple Jurisdictions

A Singapore investor transfers money into what appears to be a London property investment scheme. The investment proves fraudulent.

Funds have passed through:

• England;
• Cyprus;
• Hong Kong; and
• Other offshore jurisdictions.

The principal wrongdoer resides in London. In this scenario, England may become the central litigation forum because:

• The principal defendant is located here.
• English bank accounts were used.
• Freezing injunctions may be available.
• Disclosure orders can assist tracing efforts.
• Assets may be recoverable within England.

This demonstrates why England often plays a pivotal role in international fraud litigation.

Can You Sue a Company That Has No Office in England?

Yes.

This is one of the biggest misconceptions in international litigation.

A company does not necessarily require a physical presence in England before proceedings can be brought.

The English courts may still accept jurisdiction where:

• The parties agreed to English jurisdiction.
• Significant contractual obligations were performed here.
• Relevant wrongdoing occurred here.
• Assets are located here.
• There is another sufficient connection to England.

The absence of a UK office therefore does not automatically prevent litigation in England.

Serving Proceedings on a Foreign Company

Even where England has jurisdiction, proceedings must still be served properly.

This is often one of the most technically challenging aspects of international litigation.

Factors may include:

• The defendant’s location.
• Applicable international conventions.
• Translation requirements.
• Local procedural rules.
• Time limits.

In some cases, permission from the English court will be required before proceedings can be served abroad.

Businesses therefore benefit from considering service issues early rather than after proceedings are issued.

Brexit, Jurisdiction, and the Hague Convention

Brexit altered the legal framework governing certain cross-border disputes. As a result, parties can no longer assume that pre-Brexit approaches automatically apply.

Particular attention should now be paid to:

• Jurisdiction clauses.
• Governing law provisions.
• Hague Convention considerations.
• Enforcement planning.

For many businesses, this makes careful contract drafting more important than ever.

What Happens If the Defendant Challenges Jurisdiction?

Jurisdiction disputes are common in international litigation.

A foreign defendant may argue that:

• England is not the correct forum.
• Another country’s courts should determine the dispute.
• The jurisdiction clause is invalid.
• Proceedings have been brought in the wrong place.

These preliminary disputes can become extremely important because they influence:

• Costs.
• Timing.
• Settlement leverage.
• Enforcement prospects.

A strong jurisdiction strategy should therefore be established before proceedings are commenced.

International Jurisdiction Disputes: Common Scenarios

Jurisdiction disputes frequently arise before the substantive claim is considered.

Below are some common examples.

The Overseas Distributor

A manufacturer based in England appoints a distributor in South America.

The agreement contains an English jurisdiction clause.

When the relationship breaks down, the distributor argues that proceedings should take place locally rather than in England.

The English court may be required to determine whether the parties’ contractual agreement should be enforced and whether the dispute falls within the scope of the clause.

The International Technology Agreement

A software provider based in the United States supplies services to a UK customer.

No express jurisdiction clause exists. Following an alleged breach of contract, both sides seek to commence proceedings in different countries.

The court may need to consider where the contract was performed, where losses occurred, and which forum is most appropriate.

The Multi-Jurisdictional Fraud Claim

An investor located in the Middle East transfers funds to a project promoted by individuals based in several countries.

Bank accounts in England are used to receive the money.

The investor wishes to seek recovery through the English courts due to the availability of injunctions and disclosure orders.

In cases such as these, jurisdiction can become one of the most heavily contested issues in the litigation.

Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of each potential forum at an early stage can significantly influence the outcome of the dispute.

Why Jurisdiction Strategy Matters

Many businesses focus entirely on proving their claim.

However, selecting the right forum can be just as important.

The wrong jurisdiction can lead to:

• Increased costs.
• Delays.
• Duplicative proceedings.
• Enforcement difficulties.

The right jurisdiction can:

• Improve settlement leverage.
• Provide access to interim remedies.
• Simplify enforcement.
• Reduce overall litigation risk.

From a commercial perspective, jurisdiction is often one of the most important strategic decisions in the entire dispute.

What Information Should You Gather Before Deciding Where To Sue?

Before commencing proceedings, businesses should take time to assemble key information.

This exercise often reveals whether England is likely to be an appropriate forum and helps shape the wider litigation strategy.

Questions to consider include:

What Does the Contract Say?

The starting point should always be the contract.

Businesses should review:

• Governing law clauses.
• Jurisdiction clauses.
• Arbitration provisions.
• Notice requirements.
• Service of process provisions.

A carefully drafted jurisdiction clause can often determine the issue immediately.

Where Are the Parties Located?

Understanding where defendants are based remains critical.

This includes:

• Registered office addresses.
• Principal places of business.
• Offices and branches.
• Locations of key directors and decision-makers.

Where Are the Assets?

Many businesses focus on where proceedings can be issued but pay less attention to where assets are located.

In practice, the location of recoverable assets is frequently one of the most important strategic considerations.

A judgment obtained in the perfect forum may have little practical value if enforcement is difficult.

Is Urgent Action Required?

In some disputes, waiting may create significant risks.

For example:

• Assets may be sold.
• Funds may be transferred.
• Evidence may disappear.
• Contractual rights may expire.

Where urgency exists, businesses should assess whether interim relief may be necessary before proceedings are issued.

What Evidence Is Available?

Finally, parties should consider:

• Documentary evidence.
• Witnesses.
• Expert evidence.
• Banking records.
• Corporate records.

Identifying evidential strengths and weaknesses at an early stage can significantly reduce costs and improve the prospects of a successful outcome.

Businesses that undertake this exercise before commencing proceedings often make better strategic decisions and avoid expensive jurisdictional disputes later in the process.

Enforcement Should Be Considered Before Proceedings Begin

Many successful claimants discover that obtaining judgment is only half the battle.

Before commencing proceedings, businesses should also consider:

Can the Judgment Realistically Be Enforced?

A judgment has little value if the defendant possesses no recoverable assets.

Can the Judgment Be Enforced?

Before commencing proceedings, businesses should consider what steps will be available if they ultimately obtain judgment. Recovery prospects can vary considerably depending on the jurisdiction involved and the nature of the defendant’s business.

Is Interim Relief Needed?

Where there is a risk of dissipation, urgent remedies may need to be considered before the litigation progresses.

The most effective litigation strategy is therefore usually one that integrates jurisdiction, interim relief and enforcement from the beginning.

Common Mistakes Businesses Make in Cross-Border Litigation

Assuming England Cannot Hear the Claim

Many businesses incorrectly assume that foreign defendants cannot be sued in England.

Ignoring Enforcement

Winning a claim and recovering money are different objectives.

Failing to Review Jurisdiction Clauses

A carefully drafted jurisdiction clause may determine where proceedings are brought.

Delaying Action

In fraud cases particularly, delay can significantly reduce recovery prospects.

Overlooking Asset Location

The location of assets may be just as important as the merits of the claim itself.

Drafting Better Contracts for Future Protection

Many jurisdiction disputes can be avoided through careful drafting.

Businesses entering international contracts should consider:

• English governing law clauses.
• Exclusive jurisdiction clauses.
• Service of process provisions.
• Asset preservation considerations.
• Dispute resolution mechanisms.

Good drafting often reduces uncertainty and improves enforcement prospects if disputes later arise.

Get in touch with us

At Lincoln & Rowe, we understand the importance of helping our clients keep their businesses running smoothly. As well as in-depth commercial expertise, we provide excellent service to our clients and practical advice and guidance.

We have wide-ranging experience in litigation and corporate law and were named as winners of the Global 100 for Best Firm for Commercial Disputes of the Year 2025 and GameChangers Global Awards for Commercial Litigation Law Firm of the Year in the United Kingdom 2025.

If you would like to talk to one of our expert legal team members about any queries you may have, contact the author, Dipesh Dosani, or call the team today on 020 3968 6030, and we’ll be happy to help.

The above information is for general guidance on your rights and responsibilities and is not legal advice. If you need more details on your rights or legal advice about what action to take, please contact a legal advisor.