Stylianou v Toyoshima and another [2013] EWHC 2188 (QB), [2013] All ER (D) 36 (Aug)
Generally, while it was clear that Art 4(3) of Rome II was only intended to be an escape clause and it was only to be applied exceptionally so as to preserve the intended application of the general rule to most cases, Art 4(3) of Rome II was not to be construed in the same manner as Art 4(1) of Rome II and should not, therefore, apply to direct damage. The use of the words “in all the circumstances” in Art 4(3) of Rome II required the court to consider all relevant material, so as to be able to assess whether the particular circumstances of the individual case were so exceptional that the general rule should not apply. Such a consideration was intended to include factors relating to the parties and would also include the consequences of the event or tort/delict. Such consequences would cover the injuries and damage arising from the tort, whether direct or indirect. If such a broad interpretation
