Tae Hee Choi v. Samsung Heavy Industries Co.

Good Law
129 F. App'x 394
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 28, 2005No. 03-56192California464 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Tae Hee Choi and eight other appellants (collectively “Choi”) entered into contracts for the purchase of condominium units in Seoul, Korea. Samsung Heavy Industries is the contractor/builder of these units. When Choi discovered that the units did not appear to be as promised, they brought various fraud-based claims against Samsung in the Central District of California. Choi appeals the district court’s dismissal of his claims on the grounds that (1) the court lacked personal jurisdiction over Samsung and (2) the parties’ forum selection clause designated Korea as the appropriate forum.

We affirm on the second ground, and therefore we do not address the personal jurisdiction issue. We hold that the forum selection clause is mandatory and enforceable.

First, the clause is mandatory; it states “all litigations ... shall be referred” to Korea. See Docksider, Ltd. v. Sea Tech., Ltd., 875 F.2d 762 , 764 (9th Cir.1989). The clause’s reference to the Korean Civil Proceedings Act does not change this conclusion. We do not believe that the Korean Civil Proceedings Act intends to grant venue and jurisdiction beyond Korea’s borders.

Second, the clause is enforceable. On…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.