The authors of this post are Chukwuma Okoli, Assistant Professor in Commercial Conflict of Laws at the University of Birmingham, and Senior Research Associate at the University of Johannesburg; and Abubakri Yekini, Lecturer in Conflict of Laws at the University of Manchester.
On December 21, 2023, the Nigerian Senate in line with Section 231(2) of the 1999 Constitution, confirmed the appointment of Honourable Justice Habeeb A.O. Abiru (“Justice Abiru”), alongside ten other justices, to the Nigerian Supreme Court, following the recommendation of the National Judicial Council and the Nigerian President. This appointment fills the vacancy created by recent retirements or deaths of some justices.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Chukwuma Okolihttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngChukwuma Okoli2024-01-07 04:12:462024-01-08 00:36:04The Nigerian Supreme Court now has a Specialist in Conflict of Laws
A new special issue of the University of Brasilia Law Journal is dedicated to the topic “Private International Law and Sustainable Development: Global and Latin American Perspectives”. The issue, co-edited by Véronica Ruiz Abou-Nigm and María Mercedes Albornoz, is based on contributions to a panel at the 15th conference of ASADIP in Asunción, Paraguay (2022), and contains some articles in Spanish, some in English. The issue is available as open access.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Ralf Michaelshttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngRalf Michaels2023-12-20 16:26:422023-12-20 16:26:42Private International Law and Sustainable Development: Global and Latin American Perspectives
The New Zealand Court of Appeal has just released a judgment on the cross-border application of New Zealand consumer and fair trading legislation (Body Corporate Number DPS 91535 v 3A Composites GmbH [2023] NZCA 647). The Court held that local consumer legislation – in the form of the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) – applies to foreign manufacturers. It also clarified that fair trading legislation – in the form of the Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) – applies to representations made to recipients in New Zealand. The decision is of particular interest to New Zealand consumers and manufacturers of goods that are supplied in New Zealand, as well as traders advertising their products to New Zealanders. More generally, the judgment provides a useful analysis of the interrelationship between statutory interpretation and choice of law, and lends weight to the proposition that product liability is properly governed by the law of the place of supply (or injury).
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Maria Hookhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngMaria Hook2023-12-19 20:55:052023-12-20 12:31:13The New Zealand Court of Appeal on the cross-border application of New Zealand consumer and fair trading legislation
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Chukwuma Okolihttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngChukwuma Okoli2023-12-16 08:21:152023-12-17 07:11:39First View Articles for International and Comparative Law Quarterly Issue 1 of 2024
The New Zealand High Court recently granted a permanent anti-enforcement injunction in relation to a default judgment from Kentucky in Kea Investments Ltd v Wikeley Family Trustee Limited [2023] NZHC 3260. The plaintiff, a British Virgin Islands company, claimed that the defendants had committed a tortious conspiracy against it because the Kentucky default judgment was based on fabricated claims intended to defraud it. The defendants were a New Zealand company, Wikeley Family Trustee Ltd (WFTL), and persons associated with the company.
In an undefended judgment, the High Court granted the injunction, awarded damages for the costs incurred in the foreign proceedings (referring to cases such as Union Discount Co Ltd v Zoller [2001] EWCA Civ 1755, [2002] 1 WLR 1517 by analogy), and issued a declaration that the Kentucky judgment would not be recognised or enforceable in New Zealand. As noted previously on this blog (see here), the case is an interesting example of “the fraud exception to the principles of comity” (Kea Investments Ltd v Wikeley (No 2) [2023] QSC 215 at [192]).
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Maria Hookhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngMaria Hook2023-12-05 00:25:472023-12-05 14:53:51The jurisdictional hurdles of s 26 of the Trans-Tasman Proceedings Act 2010 (Cth), in the context of interim anti-enforcement relief in aid of New Zealand proceedings
In Sharp v Autorité des marchés financiers, 2023 SCC 29 (available here) the Supreme Court of Canada has held that a Quebec administrative tribunal, the Financial Markets Administrative Tribunal, can hear a proceeding brought by the administrative agency that regulates Quebec’s financial sector, the Autorité des marchés financiers, against four defendants who reside in British Columbia. The AMF alleged in the proceedings that the defendants had contravened the Quebec Securities Act.
The courts below, including a majority of the Quebec Court of Appeal, focused the analysis on s. 93 of the Act respecting the Autorité des marchés financiers, CQLR, c. A-33.2, which grants the FMAT jurisdiction to make determinations under the Securities Act. They interpreted and applied this provision in light of Unifund Assurance Co. v Insurance Corp. of British Columbia, 2003 SCC 40, a leading decision on the scope of application of provincial law, which held that a provincial regulatory scheme constitutionally applies to an out-of-province defendant when there is a “real and substantial connection”, also described as a “sufficient connection”, between the province and the defendant. This test was met on the facts [see para 22] and so the FMAT had jurisdiction. This analysis is not generally understood as being within the field of conflict of laws. Indeed, the majority of the Court of Appeal “saw no conflict of jurisdiction or any conflict of laws that would require the application of private international law rules to this case” [see para 29].
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Stephen Pitelhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngStephen Pitel2023-11-27 12:25:002023-11-27 12:25:00Is this a Conflicts Case?
In the summer of 2023 Tine Van Hof defended her PhD on this topic at the University of Antwerp. The thesis will be published by Hart Publishing in the Studies in Private International Law series (expected in 2025). She has provided this short summary of her research.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Thalia Krugerhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngThalia Kruger2023-11-22 08:00:212023-11-24 02:20:22International child abduction: navigating between private international law and children’s rights law
Conflicts of laws in cross-border defamation cases are politically and culturally sensitive and their resolution has always been difficult. But the ubiquity of the internet has increased their frequency, complexity, and intensity. Faced with the realities of the online environment—including the virtual disappearance of national borders—several countries have acted unilaterally to preserve their values and protect their interests. Some countries enacted laws favouring consumers or other potential plaintiffs, while other countries took steps to protect potential defendants, including publishers and internet service providers. As a result, these conflicts are now more contentious than ever before. We believe there is a better way—even-handed multilateral action rather than self-serving unilateral action. In this article, we advance two proposals for multilateral action. The first is a set of soft law principles in the form of a resolution adopted by the Institut de Droit International in 2019. The second is a proposed Model Defamation Convention. After presenting and comparing these two instruments, we apply them to two scenarios derived from two leading cases (the first and one of the latest of the internet era) decided by courts of last resort. The first scenario is based on Dow Jones & Company Inc v Gutnick, which was decided by the High Court of Australia in 2002. The second is based on Gtflix Tv v. DR, which was decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union at the end of 2021. We believe that these two instruments would produce more rational solutions to these and other cross-border defamation conflicts. But if we fail to persuade readers on the specifics, we hope to demonstrate that other multilateral solutions are feasible and desirable, and that they are vastly superior to a continuing unilateral “arms race.” In any event, we hope that this article will spur the development of other proposals for multilateral action.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Chukwuma Okolihttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngChukwuma Okoli2023-11-14 08:50:002023-11-14 15:39:41Second Issue of the Journal of Private International Law for 2023
Two years ago, the Uniform Law Conference of Canada (ULCC) released a revised version of the Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act (CJPTA), model legislation putting the taking of jurisdiction and staying of proceedings on a statutory footing. The statute is available here.
The ULCC has now released a revised version of another model statute, the Enforcement of Canadian Judgments Act (ECJA). The original version of this statute was prepared in 1998 and had been amended four times. It has now been consolidated and substantially revised. It is available here and background information is available here and here.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Stephen Pitelhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngStephen Pitel2023-11-13 11:32:072023-11-10 11:48:53Revised Canadian Statute on Judgment Enforcement
On 6 October 2023, Rwanda deposited its instrument of accession to the HCCH 1961 Apostille Convention and applied to become a Member of the HCCH. Following a six-month voting period, and provided a majority of votes have been cast in its favour, Rwanda will be invited to become a Member by accepting the Statute of the HCCH. With the accession of Rwanda, the 1961 Apostille Convention now has 126 Contracting Parties. It will enter into force for Rwanda on 5 June 2024. More information is available here.
On 27 October 2023, Canada deposited its instrument of ratification of, and Kyrgyzstan its instrument of accession to, the HCCH 2007 Child Support Convention. With the ratification of Canada and the accession of Kyrgyzstan, 48 States and the European Union are bound by the 2007 Child Support Convention. It will enter into force for Canada on 1 February 2024 and for Kyrgyzstan on 1 November 2024. The application of the Convention in Canada will extend to the provinces of Manitoba and Ontario. More information is available here.
