header-logo header-logo

30 April 2009 / Richard Scorer
Issue: 7367 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Jurisdiction matters

Part one: Richard Scorer reviews the reverse impact of Rome II

* * * * * *

For personal injury lawyers, accidents occurring in a foreign jurisdiction can present a host of complex and difficult issues.

Should the claim for damages be brought in the jurisdiction where the accident occurred, or in the English courts? If the latter, what law should the English court apply—the law of England, or the law of the jurisdiction where the accident occurred? How is the answer to that question affected by whether the issue to be determined by the English court relates to liability for the accident, or to quantum of damages? These issues are now more than ever under the spotlight as a result of Regulation 864/2007/EC on “the law applicable to non-contractual obligations” —a measure more commonly referred to as “Rome II”.

Time for change (again)

Rome II lays down a new body of choice of law rules for tort cases. It effectively replaces the existing law laid down in the Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll