THE two judgments of the Court of Appeal in Manek v IIHL Wealth (UK) Ltd. and others [2021] EWCA Civ 264 and 625 provide good examples of the complexities in determining whether the English High Court has and should exercise jurisdiction to decide a case with multiple connecting factors to many countries. The Indian claimants wished to bring an action in deceit against the defendants before the English Commercial Court. They alleged they had been cheated by the defendants out of the true value of their minority shareholding in an Indian company, Hermes. The majority shareholder was another Indian company controlled by two Indian residents, Ramu and Palani, the second and third defendants in this action. Jurisdiction against them was the only subject of the appeal. The claimants alleged that Ramu and Palani had persuaded the claimants’ representatives to sell their minority holding in Hermes valued at $40 million to the majority shareholder. Hermes was then in fact swiftly sold to Wirecard, a German company, for 250 million Euros.