About Intellectual Property IP Training Respect for IP IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships AI Tools & Services The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars IP Enforcement WIPO ALERT Raising Awareness World IP Day WIPO Magazine Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Finance Intangible Assets Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Webcast WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO Translate Speech-to-Text Classification Assistant Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Laws Treaties Judgments Browse By Jurisdiction

Trinidad and Tobago

TT003-j

Back

CV 2017-00898

The defendant’s application for a stay of proceedings on the grounds that Trinidad and Tobago is forum non conveniens was refused.

The claimant sought declaratory relief as to its exclusive right to provide broadcasts of the 2018 and 2022 World Cup within the United States of America (USA). However, the defendant sought a stay of the proceedings on the grounds that Trinidad and Tobago is forum non conveniens and that the USA is the more appropriate forum.

In May 2012, the Trinidad and Tobago Football Association (“TTFA”) signed a Rights Acquisition Agreement with Traffic Sport, in which TTFA sold their broadcasting rights to Traffic Sports. The governing law of the Rights Acquisition Agreement is New York. A Soccer License Agreement was executed in May 2015 between Traffic Sports and Telemundo. The governing law of the Soccer License Agreement is Florida. The claimant became aware that the TTFA appeared to transfer broadcast rights of the qualifying matches to Elite Soccer Agency (“Elite”).

The two main issues before the court were: (a) Was Trinidad and Tobago a forum non conveniens? and if not, (b) Is Telemundo entitled to injunctive relief?

TTFA was served and accepted service in Trinidad and Tobago. However, the Soccer License Agreement included a clause providing for the exclusive jurisdiction of Florida. The court held the view that the litigants were not the parties to the Soccer License Agreement (the parties were Traffic Sport and Telemundo), and as such, they were not bound to the exclusive jurisdiction clause.

In considering the prejudice to either party in granting or refusing the stay of proceedings, the court bore in mind that the games were scheduled to take place in Trinidad and Tobago. If the claim was to be heard in another jurisdiction, it would (a) render the enforceability of a decision against the defendant virtually impossible and (b) result in the claimant not obtaining injunctive relief. The application to stay the proceedings was therefore refused.

On the second issue of whether to grant injunctive relief to the claimant, the court took the position that the claimant presented a serious question to be tried due to their submission that the defendant disregarded their broadcasting rights by wrongfully attempting to sell those rights to a third party.

The court held the view that there would be a greater risk of injustice to the claimant if injunctive relief was not granted; the claimant was at risk of losing firstly the specific sum of 50,000 and 80,000 Trinidad and Tobago Dollars, which they would have received for the matches in question. There was also the risk of losing an unquantified sum in the loss of their reputation and loss of fan base to other competitors in the USA. Injunctive relief was granted for the matches to be aired March 24 and 28, 2017. With regards to the qualifying matches in 2020, the court’s view was that there was a great likelihood that the substantive claim would be determined by then.

Cases referred to (non-exhaustive):

Spiliade Maritime Corporation v. Cansulex Ltd. [1978] 1 AC 460

Donohue v. Armco Inc. and Others [2002] 1 All ER