header-logo header-logo

Conflict of laws

28 February 2014
Issue: 7596 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Wall v Mutuelle de Poitiers Assurances [2014] EWCA Civ 138, [2014] All ER (D) 178 (Feb)

Nothing in Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) 864/2007 (on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations) (Rome II) mandated a court, trying a case to which a foreign law applied, pursuant to that Regulation, to award the same amount of damages as the foreign court would award. It could not be the case that Rome II envisaged that the law of the place where the damage occurred would govern the way in which evidence of fact or opinion was to be given to the court which had to determine the case. It was inevitable that the same facts tried in different countries might result in different outcomes.

 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll