English law used in negligence dispute

Clive Dawson and Kimberly Dawson v Broughton

(Manchester County Court - 31 July 2007)

The defendant was driving in his car in France when it was involved in a collision. The claimants were passengers in the defendant's car, as were the first defendant's partner and her daughter. Sadly, the first claimant's partner was killed. Both claimants sought damages for personal injury and the first claimant brought a claim on behalf of his partner's estate under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 and the Fatal Accidents Act 1976.

Primary liability was not in dispute, but there was an issue of contributory negligence. It was alleged that the first claimant's partner was not wearing a seat belt.

All the parties were English, but the claimants had moved to France. The trial dealt with the issue of whether English or French law should apply to the negligence dispute.

Under the Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995, the starting point was that French law applied. The judge considered whether contributory negligence was a matter of substantive or procedural law.

It was found that contributory negligence is inextricably bound up with causation and was thus a matter of substantive law. In these circumstances, where the claim had been submitted in England, it was inequitable for the claimants to submit to the English jurisdiction but then seek to avoid the disadvantages of English law on contributory negligence. The parties were more strongly connected to England then France and thus English law applied.

COMMENT

This case highlights the difficult issues inherent within cases involving jurisdictional issues. - Rebekah Walker, BLM Manchester