Message-ID: <5012022.1075853179588.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 04:15:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: richard.sanders@enron.com
Subject: Draft Hague Convention
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Richard B Sanders
X-To: 
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Richard_Sanders_Oct2001\Notes Folders\All documents
X-Origin: Sanders-R
X-FileName: rsanders.nsf

----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 08/25/2000 11:15 AM -----

	Robert C Williams@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
	08/22/2000 11:43 AM
		 
		 To: Richard Sanders
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Draft Hague Convention

Would you forward to the correct Michael Brown for me?  Thanks.
---------------------- Forwarded by Robert C Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 
08/22/2000 11:47 AM ---------------------------


Robert C Williams
08/21/2000 11:14 AM
To: Richard Sanders
cc: Rob Walls, Joe Hillings@ENRON, Michael L 
Brown/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 

Subject: Draft Hague Convention

Richard,

Rob has asked for some input on the proposed Draft Hague Convention relating 
to jurisdiction and the enforcement of foreign judgments.   One of the new 
proposals could have implications for trading.   The proposal would arguably 
subject a company to suit in a jurisdiction where it has an accessible 
website for conducting e-commerce.   However, under the Convention this grant 
of jurisdiction would apparently (I am still studying this) be overridden by 
a contractually-agreed forum selection clause.  Do our current e-business 
contracts contain a forum selection clause?  Would you anticipate that we 
would conduct trades in the future without a previously-agreed forum 
selection clause?

Thanks for your help.

