Albemarle Corp. v. AstraZeneca UK Ltd.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• considering the policy of South Carolina where the parties had contracted to litigate in the English High Court, but Plaintiff brought the action in South Carolina
• “We analyze this contract as one that contains both a choice of law clause and a forum selection clause.”
• forum selection clause may be found unreasonable if “[its] formation was induced by fraud or over-reaching”
• “Thus, for an action filed in South Carolina, South Carolina law would be consulted for its choice of law rules, and under those rules, South Carolina law would give effect to the parties’ choice of law as specified in the contract.”
• considering and declining to apply an analogous South Carolina statute
• “When construing forum selection clauses, federal courts have found dispositive the particular language of the clause and whether it authorizes another forum as an alternative to the forum of the litigation or whether it makes the designated forum exclusive.” (emphasis in original)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).