In the meantime, the English courts, like musicians on the Titanic, must ignore the threat to their traditional competences and continue to make decisions as to whether or not service out of the jurisdiction is permitted.5 Global 5000 Ltd v Wadhawan, 6 the subject of this note, is the latest in a series of cases concerned with the scope of the provision authorising service out of a claim made “ in respect of a contract” which has a relevant connection to the jurisdiction, in that it (a) was made in England or Wales, (b) was made through an agent trading or residing in England or Wales, (c) is governed by English law, or (d) contains a term conferring jurisdiction on the English court.7 Recently, and in an apparent departure from earlier practice,8 the courts have interpreted this ground very broadly, in particular (1) as not being limited to claims which are contractual in nature or which may otherwise be described as being brought “under” a contract,9 (2) as not requiring that the relevant contract be one to which both the claimant and defendant were parties,10 and (3) possibly, as not even requiring that the defendant be a party to the