header-logo header-logo

21 May 2009 / Richard Scorer
Issue: 7370 / Categories: Features , EU , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Jurisdiction matters

Part 2: Richard Scorer believes Rome II is imprecise and does not provide sufficient certainty

In my article on Rome II I explained how Council Regulation 864/2007/ EC on “the law applicable to non-contractual obligations” lays down a new body of choice of law rules for tort cases (NLJ, 1 May 2009, p 621). The Regulation replaces the existing law laid down in the Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995, as interpreted by the House of Lords in Harding v Wealands [2006] All ER (D) 40 (Jul). Effectively, Rome II reverses the decision in Harding. However, there are exceptions to the general rule under Rome II and overall the Regulation is unclear and does not provide certainty.

A complicating factor in analysing the impact of Rome II is confusion over its date of implementation. Rome II “came into force” on 19 August 2007. However, the Regulation “applies” from 11 January 2009. The Regulation also says that it applies to “events giving rise to damage after its entry into force”. What is the practitioner to

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll