Views
Data on Choice-of-Court Clause Enforcement in US
The United States legal system is immensely complex. There are state courts and federal courts, state statutes and federal statutes, state common law and federal common law. When I imagine a foreign lawyer trying to explain this system to a foreign client, my heart fills with pity.
This feeling of pity is compounded when I imagine this same lawyer trying to advise her client as to whether a choice-of-court clause will be enforced by a court in the United States. The law on this subject is complicated. It is, moreover, not easy to determine how it is applied in practice. Are there differences in clause enforcement rates across the states? Across federal circuits? Do state courts enforce these clauses at the same rate as federal courts? Until recently, there was no data that would allow a foreign lawyer – or a U.S. lawyer, for that matter – to answer any of these questions.
Over the past several years, I have authored or co-authored several empirical articles that seek to answer the questions posed above. This post provides a summary of the data gathered for these articles. All of the cases referenced involve outbound choice-of-court clauses, i.e. clauses that select a jurisdiction other than the one where the suit was filed. Readers interested in the data collection process, the caveats to which the data is subject, or other methodological issues should consult the articles and their appendices. This post first describes state court practice. It then describes federal court practice. It concludes with a brief discussion comparing the two.
Polish Constitutional Court about to review the constitutionality of the jurisdictional immunity of a foreign State?
Written by Zuzanna Nowicka, lawyer at the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights and lecturer at Department of Logic and Legal Argumentation at University of Warsaw
In the aftermath of the judgment of the ICJ of 2012 in the case of the Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening) that needs no presentation here (for details see, in particular, the post by Burkhard Hess), by its judgment of 2014, the Italian Constitutional Court recognized the duty of Italy to comply with the ICJ judgment of 2012 but subjected that duty to the “fundamental principle of judicial protection of fundamental rights” under Italian constitutional law (for a more detailed account of those developments see this post on EAPIL by Pietro Franzina and further references detailed there). In a nutshell, according to the Italian Constitutional Court, the fundamental human rights cannot be automatically and unconditionally sacrificed in each and every case in order to uphold the jurisdiction immunity of a foreign State allegedly responsible for serious international crimes.
Since then, the Italian courts have reasserted their jurisdiction in such cases, in some even going so far as to decide on the substance and award compensation from Germany. The saga continues, as Germany took Italy to the ICJ again in 2022 (for the status of the case pending before the ICJ see here). It even seems not to end there as it can be provocatively argued that this saga has its spin-off currently taking place before the Polish courts.
The Greek Supreme Court has decided: Relatives of persons killed in accidents are immediate victims
A groundbreaking judgment was rendered last October by the Greek Supreme Court. Relatives of two Greek crew members killed in Los Llanos Air Base, Spain, initiated proceedings before Athens courts for pain and suffering damages (solatium). Although the action was dismissed by the Athens court of first instance, and the latter decision was confirmed by the Athens court of appeal, the cassation was successful: The Supreme Court held that both the Brussels I bis Regulation and the Lugano Convention are establishing international jurisdiction in the country where the relatives of persons killed are domiciled, because they must be considered as direct victims.
THE FACTS
On 26 January 2015, an F-16D Fighting Falcon jet fighter of the Hellenic Air Force crashed into the flight line at Los Llanos Air Base in Albacete, Spain, killing 11 people: the two crew members and nine on the ground.
The relatives of the Greek crew members filed actions for pain and suffering damages before the Athens court of first instance against a US (manufacturer of the aircraft) and a Swiss (subsidiary of the manufacturer) company. The action was dismissed in 2019 for lack of international jurisdiction. The appeals lodged by the relatives before had the same luck: the Athens court of appeal confirmed in 2020 the first instance ruling. The relatives filed a cassation, which led to the judgment nr. 1658/5.10.2022 of the Supreme Court.
News
2024 Asia-Pacific Colloquium of the Journal of Private International Law (JPIL)
The 2024 Asia-Pacific Colloquium of the Journal of Private International Law (JPIL) will be held on 5-6 December 2024 at the Melbourne Law School of the University of Melbourne in Australia.
Application Now Open: The Hague Academy of International Law’s Advanced Course in Hong Kong – 2nd Edition (2024)
The second edition of the HAIL Advanced Courses in Hong Kong, organised in cooperation with with the Asian Academy of International Law and (AAIL) and the Hong Kong Department of Justice, will take place on 2-6 December 2024 with a focus on one of the key features of Private International Law, namely Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters, in particular the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention.
Read more
19th Regional PIL Conference on 20 September 2024 at the University of East Sarajevo, B&H
The 19th Regional Private International Law Conference will take place on 20 September 2024 at the Faculty of Law, University of East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, with the support of the Deutche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GIZ). The theme of the Conference is Application of General Legal Principles in Contemporary Private International Law.
The opening panel will feature the following topics and speakers:
- Christophe Bernasconi, Secretary General, The HCCH and its Ongoing Work, with a Focus on Transnational Litigation, The Hague Conference on Private International Law
- Vesna Lazic, Corporate Sustainability and Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD): Relevance for Private International Law, Utrecht University and Asser Institute, The Hague
- Meliha Povlakic and Sevleta Halilovic, The Collision Issues Regarding the Agreement as to Succession in B&H: Cross-Border and Interlocal Conflicts of Law, University of Sarajevo, Faculty of Law
- Toni Deskoski and Vangel Dokovski, Temporal Application Challenges of Private International Law: A Judicial Perspective, University Ss. Cyril and Methodius, Faculty of Law Iustinianus Primus
The full programme of the conference can be found here.
The working language of the Conference will be English, and it will also be streamed online via Zoom (https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84284962839?pwd=alsUT8OQf9DR0y5shNlG0u12dxnc01.1; Meeting ID: 842 8496 2839; Passcode: 059110).
Conference proceedings will be published next year. Last year’s conference proceedings can be found here.