header-logo header-logo

02 May 2014 / Sarah Crowther KC
Issue: 7604 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Translation service

new_web_crowther

Sarah Crowther examines practical guidance for assessing PI damages under a foreign law

In the first decision of the English courts since the entry into force of Rome II (EC Regulation 864/2007), Wall v Mutuelle de Poitiers Assurances [2014] EWCA Civ 138, seeks to set out the new approach to assessment of damages in personal injury claims to which a foreign law applies.

 

This article considers how much guidance Wall has provided and which issues remain open-ended.

Applying foreign law to a claim in the Courts of England & Wales

Since 1996, for all tort issues in a case with a foreign element, the English and Welsh courts have had to apply the “choice of law” rules, sometimes leading to the substantive law of another country being applied to an action proceeding domestically. Pursuant to the Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995, the heads of recoverable loss, together with other substantive law concepts such as duty to mitigate and contributory fault, would be governed by the foreign applicable law. However,

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll