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: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll