CANADIAN-AMERICAN TORTS IN THE CONFLICT OF LAWS: THE REVIVAL OF POLICY-DETERMINED CONSTRUCTION ANALYSIS
AbstractIn this article the author examines questions surrounding what laws a forum will apply in deciding a case where the choice is between the place where the accident occurred and the domicile of the nominal defendant. First, the author illustrates the shortcomings of the choice-of-law formula taken from the case of Phillips v. Eyre. Next, the author examines several recent American cases in which choice-of-law problems have been approached as problems of construction or interpretation, and the place-of-wrong approach has been rejected. The author then discusses a series of Canadian tort cases where there is an apparent judicial construction present in the decisions. He concludes his article by summarizing the most obvious defects of both the place-of-wrong approach and the Phillips v. Eyre formula, and by examining suggestions made in the latest report of the Committee of the Commissioners on Uniformity of Legislation.
Keywords:Conflict of Laws
Download data is not yet available.