|
|
| (10 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| If you've ever despaired at the pernicketiness of {{tag|Governing Law}} clauses such as this:
| | {{a|negotiation|}}{{Noncontractualobligations}} |
| | |
| {{box|This agreement and any non-contractual obligations arising out of or in connection with it are governed by English law.}}
| |
| | |
| Then you have the [[Rome II]] {{tag|EU Regulation}} ({{eureg|864|2007|EC}} to blame. It was published on 31 July 2007 and applies to all {{tag|EU}} Member States (except {{tag|Denmark}}) . It aims to harmonise the conflict of laws rules applied by Member States when dealing with disputes involving non-contractual obligations and means that one rule for choice of law in such disputes applies across all Member States.
| |
| ===[[Non-contractual obligations]]===
| |
| In this context “[[non-contractual obligations]]” includes claims based on [[tort]] such as [[negligence]], breach of [[competition law]] and breach of [[statutory duty]]. But, brilliantly, it does not apply to non-contractual obligations arising under [[bills of exchange]], [[cheque]]s and [[promissory note]]s and other [[negotiable instrument]]s which arise out of their negotiable character.
| |
| | |
| Rome II doesn't apply to company law or defamation, either. Though it's kind of hard to see how you could have a contractual obligation to defame someone.
| |
| | |
| But point to note here: the main thing is to ensure any [[concurrent liability|claims]] in [[contract]] and [[tort]] are governed by the same forum. Of most interest in cross border cases where parties are in different jurisdictions and that wouldn't follow as a matter of course. and even there, frankly, a concurrent claim in tort would only be relevant in most cases to [[concurrent liability|builders]].
| |
| | |
| Of course, the sensible thing would be to expressly exclude tortious claims under the contract. But for those not prescient enough to do that, there's always this magic incantation.
| |
| | |
| ===Jurisdiction: you choose!=== | | ===Jurisdiction: you choose!=== |
| Parties can agree to submit non-contractual obligations to the law of their choice. Previously English courts haven't been sure as to whether this is cricket. Rome II confirms that it is: | | Parties can agree to submit [[non-contractual obligations]] to the law of their choice. Previously, English courts haven’t been sure as to whether this is {{tag|cricket}}. Rome II confirms that it is: |
| *Where the agreement was made after the event giving rise to the damage; or | | *Where the agreement was made after the event giving rise to the damage; or |
| *Where all parties are pursuing a commercial activity, if freely negotiated ''before'' the event giving rise to the damage occurred. | | *Where all parties are pursuing a commercial activity, if freely negotiated ''before'' the event giving rise to the damage occurred. |
|
| |
|
| ===See also===
| | {{sa}} |
| *[[Contractual negligence]] | | *[[Contractual negligence]] |
| *[[Concurrent liability]] | | *[[Concurrent liability]] |
| *[[Negligence, fraud or wilful default]] | | *[[Negligence, fraud or wilful default]] |
| | {{ref}} |