Welcome to this third edition of Getting the Deal Through – Complex Commercial Litigation, focusing on the multi-faceted world of high-stakes commercial litigation practised internationally. This guide continues to look at drawing out the critical themes and highlighting important areas of differentiation. Our aim is to help readers to evaluate their litigation options when faced with a choice – either at the contractual ‘jurisdiction clause’ stage (usually in the early hours of the morning as one of the final clauses in a contract to be agreed when the main commercial terms have long been drafted) or when planning to issue a claim in the preferred jurisdiction. In a case where a defendant is overseas, then it will be an important part of any decision to issue a claim that the courts where the claim is issued will accept jurisdiction over the dispute. A well-advised claimant will not want to face the cost and disruption of a jurisdiction challenge unless it is a hopeless attempt at delay by the defendant (which is sometimes inevitable). Putting this into context, defendants wishing to object to the jurisdiction of the English courts can potentially raise their objection at an early stage in the English proceedings, or commence different proceedings elsewhere covering the same or substantially the same ground, or both, thus creating confusion (as well as inefficiency) and giving rise to the risk of inconsistent judgments, which might be difficult if not impossible to reconcile.