Suchergebnisse

The governing contract law dictates and regulates the life of a contract. Despite its importance, little is known about the choice of law decision-making process. Is there (ir)rationality involved? How can we ascertain this? How can we improve these judgements? - Rethinking Choice of Law in Cross-Border Sales is an innovative, multi-disciplinary, and practice-oriented initiative to examine what factors determine the way contracting parties choose the law to govern their agreements. It presents evidence on how negotiators approach this topic, including the main drives and triggers of their decisions. - The book also invites readers to explore and understand the idiosyncratic world of contracting parties' minds; a complex device of imperfections, cognitive limitations, and emotions. The book proposes alternatives and mechanisms to tackle, control or minimise the effects of cognitive errors within judgements. The author aims to offer both laymen and legal practitioners appropriate tools to facilitate more efficient outcomes.

Under the traditional rule enunciated by Willes J. in Phillips v.
Eyre both the lex fori and lex loci delicti are relevant, to some extent, in actions upon foreign torts. The requirements of the rule, that the wrong be actionable if committed in the jurisdiction of the forum and not justifiable by the law of the place, have been subjected to considerable judicial and extrajudicial scrutiny. In relation to the latter element, the recent and already famous House of Lords decision in Chaplin v. Boys establishes that it is not necessary to show actionability under the lex loci delicti for each and every substantive matter. In the opinion of Lord Pearson and Lord Donovan something less than complete civil liability sufficed to render an act not justifiable where donc, while Lord Wilberforce and Lord Hodson appeared to require compliance with the lex loci delicti in all respects, but were prepared to create an exception for appropriate cases.