© Getty images
Which law governs the preclusive effect of an earlier judgment? Alexander Bromwich & Marina Boterashvili explore the evolving doctrine of issue estoppel
- Aviator LLC v Spribe OÜ indicates that the preclusive effect of a prior judgment may be governed by the law applicable to the underlying claim, potentially requiring foreign law evidence.
- Recent decisions clarify the scope and limits of issue estoppel in cases involving foreign judgments, arbitral awards, interim rulings and pure questions of law.
In recent years, few areas of civil procedure have attracted as much judicial attention as the doctrine of issue estoppel. This has been in part driven by the growing prevalence of complex, multi-forum disputes, with issues requiring determination fragmented between various jurisdictions, proceedings and decision-making bodies, giving rise to increasingly difficult and fact-sensitive questions concerning the preclusive effect of prior determinations.
The recent judgment of Michael Tappin KC (sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court) in Aviator LLC v Spribe OÜ [2026] EWHC 1216 (Ch) is a noteworthy
