Facts
In 1989, Ibrahim Abdullatif Al-Issa undertook to cover the debts of a company in favor of the bank "Al Bank Al Saudi Al Hollandi" (hereinafter: the Bank), in Saudi Arabia. This act contained a clause prorogating jurisdiction in favor of the courts of Saudi Arabia. In 1997, the Bank obtained the attachment of real estate located in Rolle and belonging to Ibrahim Abdullatif Al-Issa. It opened an action for validation of attachment with the Vaud Cantonal Court, requesting the finding that Ibrahim Abdullatif Al-Issa owed it the equivalent of the amount claimed in Saudi Arabia. Ibrahim Abdullatif Al-Issa, who disputed the jurisdiction of the Vaud judicial authorities, filed an incidental request for declination of jurisdiction. By interlocutory judgment of July 7, 1999, the investigating judge dismissed the defendant's request; however, he granted the Bank's subsidiary request and suspended the case until a decision was made on the pending procedure in Saudi Arabia. By judgment of March 29, 2000, the Appeals Chamber of the Cantonal Court upheld the appeal filed by Ibrahim Abdullatif Al-Issa against the interlocutory judgment of July 7, 1999; it considered that the request for declination of jurisdiction filed by the latter was well-founded and declared the Bank dismissed from the proceedings. Against this judgment, the Bank filed an appeal for reform with the Federal Tribunal.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal upheld the Bank's appeal. It considered that the cantonal court had violated federal law by refusing to consider the exception of lis pendens arising from Art. 9 para. 1 PILA.
According to the Federal Tribunal, when the facts in its possession indicate that proceedings are pending abroad, the Swiss judge has the obligation to verify ex officio whether there is lis pendens within the meaning of Art. 9 para. 1 PILA. This requirement is all the more important in matters of…