1. The first paragraph of Article 17 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters must be interpreted as meaning that where a contract of insurance, entered into between an insurer and a policyholder and stipulated by the latter to be for his benefit and to enure for the benefit of third parties to such a contract, contains a clause conferring jurisdiction relating to proceedings which might be brought by such third parties, the latter, even if they have not expressly signed the said clause, may rely upon it provided that, as between the insurer and the policy-holder, the condition as to writing laid down by Article 17 of the Convention has been satisfied and provided that the consent of the insurer in that respect has been clearly manifested.

2. Article 18 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters must be interpreted as meaning that it allows a defendant not merely to contest jurisdiction but at the same time to submit, in the alternative, a defence on the substance of the case without thereby losing the right to raise an objection of want of jurisdiction.