Conflicts of Law Course Outline

2011 CONFLICT OF LAWS COURSE OUTLINE AND READING MATERIALS Books Morris, The struggle of legalitys (3 ed. ) 1984 Cheshire and North, tete-a-tete global law (11 ed. ) 1987 Collier, Conflict of honors (1988) Reference Dicey and Morris, Conflict of fair plays (11 ed. ) 1987 standard Morris and North, graphic symbols and Materials on tete-a-tete multinational law of nature (1984) another(prenominal) works Anton, semiprivate International law of nature (of Scotland) 1967. Cook, Logical and efficacious Bases of the Conflict of practice of laws (1942) Graveson, The Conflict of rightfulnesss (7 ed. ) 1974 Wolff, undercover International Law (2 ed. ) 1950. INTRODUCTION 1.Nature and Scope of the Subject Morris Ch. 1 (and 34), Cheshire Ch. 1 Collier, Ch. 1, 2, 21, 22 Anton Ch. 2. Mehrunnissa v Parves (1981) KLR 547 2. Reasons for the basis of the Conflict of Laws Theories Territoriality, Vested Rights, Comity, Local Law see Davies (1937) 18 BYIL 49. Slater v Mexican national Rly 194 US 120, 126 (1904) Loucks v Standard vegetable oil Co. of NY. 224 N. Y. 99 (1918). JURISDICTION 1. Preliminary Issues Patel v Singh (No 2) (1987) KLR 585 2. Common Law Position Morris Ch. 6 Cheshire, Chs. 10,11 Collier Ch. 6 Dicey, Ch. 11. (a)Presence, resignation, potence Colt Industries v Sarlie (No. ) (1966) 1 W. L. R. 440 Maharanee of Baroda v Wildenstein (1972) 2 Q. B. 282 Re change (1951) Ch. 842 Manta Line v Sofianites (1984) 1 L1. R. 14. Union Bank of M. E. v Clapham (1981) Times, 20 July. Obikoya v Silvernorth (1983) Times 6 July The Messianiki Tolmi (1984) 1L1. R. 266 Williams & Glyns v Astro Dinamico (1984) 1 All E. R. 760. Kanti v South British Ins. Co. Ltd. (1981) K. L. R. 1 (b)Limitations Cheshire Ch. 13 British South Africa Co v Companhia de Mocambique (1893) A. C 602 Mackinnon v Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Securities bay windown. (1986) 1 All E.R. 563 Ministry of Defence of the Govt of UK v Ndegwa (1983) K. L. R 68 (c)Staying of cloakions Morris, Ch. 8 Cheshire Ch. 12 Collier Ch. 7 Dicey Ch. 13. (i) cosmopolitan St. Pierre v South American Stores (1936)1 K. B. 382, at 398 Logan v Bank of Scotland (No. 2) (1906) 1 K. B. 141 Egbert v Short (1907) 2 Ch 205 Re Nortons Settlement (1908) 1 Ch. 471. Maharanee of Baroda v Wildenstein (1972) 2 . Q. B. 283 The Atlantic Star (1974) A. C. 436 McShannon v Rockware Glass (1978) A. C. 795 The Wladslaw Lokictek (1978) 2 L1. R. 520. The Wellamo (1980) 2 L1. R. 229.European Asian Bank v Punjab & Sind Bank (1981) 2 L1. R. 65. Coupland v Arabian Gulf Petroleum (1983) 2 All E. R. 436 (1983) 1 W. L. R. 1136 The Abidin Daver (1984) A. C. 398 The Jalakrishna (1983) 2 L1. R. 628. The Traugutt (1985) 1 L1. R. 76 The Forum Craftsmen (1985) 1 L1. R. 291. Spiliada v Cansulex (1987) A. C. 460. E. I. Pont de Nemours v Agnew (1987) 2 L1. R. 585 De Dampierre v de Dampierre (1988) A. C. 92. Ocean solarize v Fay (1988) 29 A. L. R. 9. The Francois Vieljeux (1982-88) 1 KAR 398, (1984) K. L. R.. 1 unify India ins urance Company and Kenindia damages Companyv E.A Underwriter &Anor (1982-88) 1 KAR 639, ((1985) K. L. R 898 (ii)Lis Alibi Pendens St . Pierre v South American Stores (above) McHenry v Lewis (1882) 22 Ch. D. 397 Cohen v Rothfield (1919) 1 K. B. 410 Ionian Bank v Coouvreur (1969) 1 W. L. R. 781 The Christianborg (1885) 10 P. D. 141 The Atlantic Star (1974) A. C. 436. Bushby v Munday (1821) 5 Madd. 297 Orr-Lewis v O-L (1949) P. 347 Sealy (orse. Callan) v Callan (1953) P. one hundred thirty-five. The Tyllie Lykes (1977) 1 L1. R. 436 Castanho v Brown & Root (1981) A. C. 557 The Abidin Daver (1984) A. C. 398 Metall und Rohstoff v ACLI Metals (1984) 1 L1.R. 598 Societe N. I. Aerospitiale v lee side Kui Jak (1987) A. C. 871 South Carolina v Ass. de Zeven Provincien (1987) A. C. 24 Meadows Insurance v Ins. Corp. of Ireland (1989) 2 L1. R. 298 Pont de Nemours v Agnew (1988) 2 L1. R. 240 A-G v Arthur Anderson (1988) Independent 31 March (iii)Submission to hostile Arbitration or distant Co urt Arbitration Act (Act N0. 4 of 1995)) Law v Garret (1878) 8 Ch. D. 26 The Fehmarn (1958) 1 W. L. R. 159 Mackender v Feldia (1967) 2 Q. B. 590 The Eleftheria (1970) P. 94 Evans Marshall v Bertola (1973) 1 W. L. R. 349.The Vishva Prabha (1979) 2 L. 1. Rep. 286. Carvalho v Hull Blyth (1979) 1 W. L. R. 1228. The El Amria (1980) 1 L1. R. 39 The Kislovodsk (1980) 1 L1. R. 183 Trendex v reference work Suisse (1982) A. C. 679 The Biskra (1983) 2 L1. R. 59 The Hollandia (1983) A. C. 565 The Benarty (1985) Q. B. 325. The Atlantic Song (1983) 2 L1. R. 394. Kisumuwaalla Oil Industries and PanAsiatic Commodities Pte Ltd v E. A. Storage Company Ltd Civil Appeal No century of 1995 Naizsons (K) Ltd v China Road and Bridge Corp (Kenya) (2001) 2 E. A. 502 experience Container Manufacturers Ltd. v Mitchell Cotts (K) Ltd (2001 2 E. A. 38 Tononoka Steels Ltd v The eastsideern ans souther Africa Development Bank 2 (2000) E. A. 536 Indigo E. P. Z. Ltd v. The P. T. A Bank (2002) 1K. L. R. 811 Rayth eon Aircraft Credit Corpn & Anor v Air Al-Faray Ltd (2005) eKLR (iv)Proceedings abroad Settlement Corpn. v Hochschild (1966) Ch. 10 smith Kline & French v Bloch (1983) 1 W. L. R. 730 Societe studye Industrielle Aerospatiale v Lee Kui Jak (1987) 3 All. E. R. 510 British Airways v Laker Airways (1985) A. C. 58 metalworker Kline & Bloch (No. 2) (1984) Times 14 Nov internal Bank v Laker Airways (1986) 1 All E.R. 526. 3. Statutory Position value out of the legal power under Civil Procedure Rules only with depart from of the court Order V Rule 21 a) General Principles The Hagen (1908) P. 189 GAF v Amchen (1975) 1 L1. R. 601 Amin Rasheed v Kuwait Insurance (1984) A. C. 50 Spiliada Maritime v Cansulex (1987) A. C. 460. Mackender v Feldia (1967) 2 Q. B. 590 Evans Marshall v Bertola (1973) 1 W. L. R. 349 Attock Cement v Romanian Bank (1989) 1 W. L. R. 1147 Matthews v Kuwait Bechtel (1959) 2 Q. B. 57. b) rest Re Liddells ST (1936) Ch. 365. (Ord 11, rule 4) c) Injunction Rosler v Hilbery (1925) Ch. 250The Siskina (1979) A. C. 210(CJ and J Act 1982 s. 25 ). X v Y and Y Republic of Haiti v Duvalier (1990) Q. B. 202. d) Necessary or proper party Chancy v spud (1948) W. N. 130 Witted v Galbraith (1949) A. C. 326 The Brabo (1949) A. C. 326 Multinational Gas v M. G. Services (1983) 3 W. L. R. 492. Qatar Petroleum v Shell (1983) L1. R. 35. e) Contract Finnish Marine v Protective Ins. (1990) 2 W. L. R. 914 Hutton v Moffarij (1989) 1 W. L. R. 488 Entores v Miles Far East Corporation (1955) 2 Q. B. 327 Brinkibon v Stahag Stahl (1982) 2 A. C. 34 Islamic Arab Insurance v Saudi Egyptian (1987) 1 L.R. 315 National Mortgage Co of NZ v Gosselin (1922) 38 T. L. R. 382 See cases on proper law of contract, esp. Amin Rasheed v Kuwait Insurance (1984) A. C. 50 The Magnum (1988) 1 L1. R. 47 The Chapparal (1968) 2 L1. R. 158 Johnson v Taylor (1920) A. C. 144 f) Tort Handelskwerkerij be Bier v Mines de Potasse. (1978) Q. B. 708 Metall u Rohstoff v Donaldson Lufkin (1990) Q. B. 391. g) sh oot down Agnew v Ussher (1884) 14 Q. B. D. 78 Kaye v Sutherland (1887) 20 Q. B. D. 147 Tassel v Hallen (1892) 1 Q. B. 321 Official Reciever v Stype (1983) 1 W. L. R. 214. (h)Trusts i)Administration of estates, probate (j)Enforcement of judgement and awards 4. capital of Belgium Convention (a)Objectives comparison with common law Berisford v New Hampshire (1990) 2 All E. R. 321 Arkwright v Bryanston (1990) 2 All E. R 335. Owusu v capital of Mississippi and Others Case C-128/01 Cheshire, Chs. 14, 16 Collier Ch. 9 Dicey, Chs. 11, 14. Part I. b) Interpretation (Reference to European Court arts 2, 3) LTU v Eurocontrol (1976) ECR 1561 Bavaria & Germania v Eurocontrol (1977) ECR 1517 Netherlands v Ruffer (1980) ECR 3807 Gourdain v Nadler (1979) ECR 733 Bertrand v Ott (1978) ECR 1431Somafer v Saar-Ferngas (1978) ECR 2183 Industrial Diamond Supplies v Riva (1977) ECR 2175 Duijnstee v Goderbauer (1983) ECR 3663 . Tessili v Dunlop (1976) ECR 1473. c) celestial sphere of application civil and commercial matters (art. 1) LTU v Eurocontrol Bavaria and Germania v Eurocontrol Netherlands v Ruffer. Exceptions De cavel v De C. (No. 1) (1979) ECR 105 (No. 2) (1980) ECR 731 W v H (1982) ECR 1189 see also The Deichland (1990) Q. B. 361. d) jurisdiction (Arts 2-23) i) General rule domicile of defendant (art 2) definition (arts 2-3 The Deichland (1989) 3 W. L. R. 478 i) particular (concurrent) jurisdiction (Arts. 5-6) especially 1. Contract place of performance of obligation Effer v Kantner (1982) ECR 825 De Bloos v Bouyer (1976) ECR 1473 Ivenel v Schwab (1982) ECR 1891 Zelger v Salinitri (1980) ECR 89 Martin Peters v Zuid Nederlandsche (1983) ECR 987 Shenavai v Kreischer (1987) 3 C. M. L. R. 782 Tesam v Shuh Mode (1989) Times 24 October Medway v Meurer (1990) Times 7 may 2. Tort where the harmful event occurred Netherlands v Ruffer (1980) ECR 3807 at 3833 Kalfelis v Schroder (1988) Times 5 October Bier v Mines de Potasse (1976) ECR 1735, (1978) Q. B. 708.Minister Investments v Hyundai (1988) 2 L1. R. 621 3. Branch, part etc Somafer v Sarr-Ferngas (1978) ECR 2183 De Bloos v Bouyer Blanckaert & Willems v Trost (1981) ECR 819 Sar Schotte v Parfums Rothschild (1988) Times12 January. 4. Insurance (arts. 7-12) Consumer Contracts (arts. 13-15) Bertrand v Ott (1978) ECR 1431. iii) Exclusive jurisdiction (art 16) especially 1. Immovables Sanders v Van der Putte (1977) ECR 2383 Roessler v Rottwinkel (1985) CMLR. 806 Scherrens v Maenhout (1988) Times 5 September. 2. Companies or Legal Persons 3. Enforcement of judgment iv) Submission v) Contractual agreement (art 17).Elefanten Schuh v Jacqmain (1981) 1671. Meeth v Glacetal (1978) ECR 2133 Salotti v Ruwa (1976) ECR 1831 Segoura v Bonakdarian, 1976 ECR 1851 Iveco order v Van Hool (1988) 1 CMLR. 5757 Anterist v Credit Lyonnais (1987) 1 CMLR 333. National Law Sanicentral v Collin (1979) ECR 3423 Ms Tilly Russ v Haven (1985) 3 W. L. R. 179 Other submission (art. 18) Elefanten Schuh v Jacqmain Rohr v Ossberger (1981) E CR 2431 W v H (1982) ECR 1189 Gerling v Tesoro (1983) ECR 2503 Berghoefer v A. S. A. (1986) 1 CMLR 13 The Sidney Express (1988) 2 L1. R. 257. vi) Scrutiny of jurisdiction and admissibility (arts. 19-20) ii) Lis pendens related action (arts. 21-23) The Nordglimt (198) Q. B. 183 The Linda (1988) 1 L1. R. 175 Gubisch Maschinenfabrik v Palumbo (1988) Times 12 January Kloeckner v Gatoil (1990) 1 L1. R. 177 Berisford v New Hampshire (1990) 2 All E. R. 335. viii) conditional and protective measures (art. 24) CHOICE OF LAW 1. General Considerations Reading list Kahn-Freund, General Problems of Private International Law Leyden, 1976 and 1980, 89-101 Wolff, Private International Law, 2nd ed, 96ff. Forsyyth, Private Interational Law, (first edition) Juta & co, 1981, 5-7. (2nd edition, 1989, pages 4-8) a)The History of the choice of law rule Lipstein, Principles of the conflict of laws, National and International 1981, 1-46. Cheshire, op cit, chapter 2. Kahn-Freund, op cit, 97-101 Forsyth, 20 -57. (b)Pleading Foreign Law The Evidence Act, division 60 A. G. of New Zealand v Ortiz (1984) A. C. 1 Vervaeke v Smith (1983) 1 A. C. 145 (c) Renvoi Kahn-Freund, op cit, 285-291. Anton, 55ff Morris, 469-480 Cheshire, 57ff Forsyth, 68-78. Munro, The Magic band of Conflict of Laws 1978 Juridicial Review 65 Hicks, The Lair Paradox in Legal Reasoning 1971 CLJ 275 at 284 and 289.In re Annesley Davidson v Annesley 1926 ch 692 In re Ross, Ross v Waterfield 1930 1 ch 377 Collier v Rivaz (1841) 2 Curt 855 Re Askew 1930 2 ch 259 Re OKeefe 1949 ch 124 Re Trufort (1887) 36 ch D 600 R v Brentwood Superintendent Registrar of Marriages, ex parte Arias 1968 2 QB 956 Amin Rasheed tape transport Corporation v Kuwait Insurance Co 1984 AC 50 (d)The incidental interrogative sentence Kahn- Freund, op cit, 291-294. Morris, op cit, 489-492. Cheshire, Private International Law, 53ff. Forsyth, op cit, 2nd ed, 78-81. Gotlieb, The incidental question revisited- theory and practise in the conflict of Laws (1977) 26 ICLQ 734.Schwebel v Ungar (1926) 42DLR (2d) 622 affd (1964) 48 DLR (2d) 644 Lawrence v Lawrence 1985 Fam 106 (e) Characterisation Kahn-Freund, op cit, 223-241 Cheshire, op cit, 43-52. Morris, op cit, 481-488 Falconbridge Conflicts Rule and Characterization of Question (1952) 30 Canadian Bar Review 103 and 264. Anton,op cit 43ff Forsyth, op cit. , 59-69 Forsyth, Extinctive Prescription and the Lex Fori (1982)99 SALJ 16 Forsyth, Characterization etc (1987) 104 SALJ 4 Bennett, Cumulation and breach Are they systemic defects in the conflict of Laws? (1988) 105 SALJ 444 Ogden v Ogden 1908 p 46Huber v Steiner (1835) 2 Bing NC 202 Re Maldonado 1954 p 223 Re Cohn 1945 ch 5 In re State of Norways Application (No 2) 1989 1 on the whole ER 701 (CA) and 745 (HL) (f) occupy and ingleside Morris, Ch. 2 Cheshire Ch. 9 Collier, Ch. 5 Dicey Ch. 7. Law of Domicil Act Cap 37 (i)Definition Whicker v Hume (1858) 7 H. L. C. 124 Gatty v A-G. (1951) P. 144 Udny v Udny (1869) L. R. 1 Sc. & D. 441 Re Annesly (1926) Ch. 692. (ii)Domicile of Origin Udny v U. Urquhart v Butterfield (1887) 37 Ch. D. 357 Re McKenzie (1951) 51 S. R. N. S. W. 293 Henderson v H (1967) P. 77 Re Jones 192 Iowa 78 (1921). (iii)Domicile of ChoiceSchiratti v Schiratti (1978) K. L. R 128 White v Tennant 31 W, Va. 790 (1888) Re Fuld (No. 3) (1968) P. 675 Bell v Kennedy (1868) L. R. 1 Sc. Div. 307 Winans v A-G (1904) A. C. 287 Ramsey v over-embellished Liverpool Infirmary (1930) A. C. 588 Ross v Ross (1930) A. C. 1 Buswell v I. R. C. (1974) 1 W. L. R. 1631 I. R. C. v wind (1976) 1 W. L. R. 1178. Puttick v A. G. (1980) Fam. 1. Re Furse (1980) 3 All E. R. 838. Brown v B. (1982) 3 F. L. R. 212 Re Clore (1984) S. T. C. 609 Cramer v C (1987) 1 F. L. R. 116 IRC v Plummer (1988) 1 W. L. R. 292 Re Lloyd Evans (1947) Ch 695 tee v Tee (1973) 3 All. E. R. 1105 iii) Special Cases 1. naturalisation Wahl v A-G. (1932) 147 L. T. 382 Re Fuld. 2. Deportees Boldirini v B. (1932) P. 9 May v May (1943) 2 All E. R. 146 S zechter v S. (1971) P. 286 Zanelli v Z (1948) 64 T. L. R. 556 Cruh v C (1945) 2 All E. R. 545. 3. Fugitives and Refugees Re Martin (1900) P. 211 De Bonneval v D. B. (1838) 1 Curt. 856 Re Lloyd-Evans (1947) Ch. 695 May v M. 4. Invalids Hoskins v Matthews (1855) 8 D. M. & G. 13 Re crowd (1908) 98 L. T. 438. 5. Servicemen Sellars v S. 1942 S. C. 206 Donaldson v D. (1949) P. 363 Cruishanks v C. (1957) 1 All E. R. 889 fossa v S. (1958) 1 W. L. R. 1287. 6. Abandonment In b. Raffenel (1863) 3 S.W. & Tr. 49 Zannelli v Z. b (1968) 1 ALL E. R. 49 Tee v Tee (1974) 1 W. L. R. 213. (iv)Domicile of Dependancy (see 37 M. L. R. 179) 1. Married Women A-G. for Alberta v Cook (1926) A. C. 444 Re Scullard (1957) Ch. 107 Domicile and Matrimonnial Proceedings Act 1973, s. 1. Puttick v A-G (1980) Fam. 1. Oundian v O. (1980) Fam. L. R. 198. IRC v Portland (1982) Ch. 314. 2. Children Johnstone v Beattie (1843) 10 Cl. & F. 42 Harrison v H. (1953) 1 W. L. R. 865 Potinger v Wightman (1817) 3 Mer. 67 Re Beau mont (1893) 3 Ch. 490 Hope v H. (1968) N. Ir. 1 Shanks v S. 1965 S. L. T. 330 Domicile Act, 1973 ss. 3, 4. 3. huffy Persons Urquhart v Butterfield Crumptons Judicial Factor v Finch-Noyes 1918 S. C. 378 Sharpe v Crispin (1860) L. R. 1 P. D. 611 (v) abode 1. Habitual Residence Cruse v Chittum (1974) 2 All E. R. 940 24 I. C. L. Q. 1. Kapur v K. (1984) F. L. R. 920. 2. Ordinary Residence Levene v I. R. C. (1928) A. C. 217 Hopkins v H. (1951) P. 116 Stransky v S. (1954) P. 248 Lewis v L. (1956) 1 W. L. R. 200. Re P (GE) (An Infant) (1965) Ch. 568. R v Barnet L. B. C. ex. P. Nilish Shah (1983) 2 A. C. 309. (vi)Corporations 1. Status National Bank of Greece and Anthens v Metliss (1958) A. C. 509 Adams v National Bank of Greece S.A. (1961) A. C. 225. 2. Domicile and Residence Ridsdon Iron and Locomotive Works v Furness (1906) 1 K. B. 49 Cesena reciprocal ohm Co. v Nicholson (1876) 1 Ex. D. 428 De Beers Consolidated v Howe (1906) A. C. 455 Egyptian Delta Land & Co. v Todd (1929) A. C. 1 Sw edish Central Rly v Thompson (1925) A. C. 495 Unit Construction Co. v Bullock (1960) A. C. 351 Gasque v I. R. C. (1940) 2 K. B. 80. Shah v Barnet London Borough Council (1983) 1 All. E. R. 226 Kapur v Kapur (1985) Fam Law. Rep. 22 2. Substantive Choice of Law Rules (a)Marriage Bishop, Choice of Law of Impotence and Wilful Refusal, (1978) 41 MLR 512.Carter, Capacity to conjoin After Foreign Divorce, (1985) 101 LQR 496. Fentiman, The Validity of marriage and the befitting Law, (1985) CLJ 256. Hartley, Polygamy and amicable Policy, (1969) 32 MLR one hundred fifty-five The Policy Basis of the position Conflict of Laws of Marriage, (1972) 35 MLR 571. Jaffey, The inhering Validity of Marriage in the English Conflict of Laws, (1978) 41 MLR 38 The Incidental Question and Capacity to Remarry, (1985) 48 MLR 465. North, Development of Rules of Private International Law in the scene of action of Family Law, (1980) I Recueil diethylstilbestrol Cours 17. Poulter, Hyde v Hyde A Reappraisal (1976) 25 ICLQ 475.Smart, Interest Analysis, False Conflicts and the Essential Validity of Marriage, (1985) 14 Anglo-Amer L Rev 225. Stone, Some Aspects of Fundamental Rights in the English Conflict of Laws in Bridge et al (eds) Fundamental Rights (1973) London, Sweet & Maxwell, pp 232, 246-7 Capacity for Polygamy Judicial chastening of Legislative Error (1983) Fam Law 76. Brook v Brook (1861) 9 HL Cas 193 De Reneville v de Reneville (1948) P 100 Cheni v Cheni (1965) P 85 Lawrence v Lawrence (1985) 2 All E. R. 733 Re Paine (1940) Ch 46 Sottomayer v De Barros (No 2) (1879) 5 PD 94 Ogden v Ogden (1908) P 46 Vervaeke v Smith (1981) 1 All ER 55Mohammed v Knott (1969) 1 QB 1 Pugh v Pugh (1951) P 482 Radwan v Radwan (No 2) (1972) 3 All ER 1026 R v Brentwood Marriage Registrar (1968) 3 All ER 279 Schwebel v Ungar (1964) 48 DLR (2d) 644 Breen v Breen (1964) P 144 Schezter v Schezter (1971) P 286 modal value v Way (1950) P 71 Ponticelli v Ponticelli (1958) P 204 Berthiaume v Dastous (1930 ) A C 79 Starkowski v AG (1954) AC 155 Lodge v Lodge (1967) 107 Sol Jo. 437 Tackzanowska v Tackzanowski (1957) P 301 (b)married Causes Forsyth, cognition of Extra-Judicial Divorces The Transnational Divoce, (1985) 34 ICLQ 398. Jaffey, Vervaeke v Smith, (1983) 32 ICLQ 500.Karsten, Recognition of Non-Judicial Divorces, (1980) 43 MLR 202. McClean, Recognition of Family Judgements in the Commonwealth (1983) London, Butterworths. North, The Private International Law of Matrimonial Causes in the British Isles and the Republic of Ireland (1977) Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing Co. Stone, The Recognition in England of Talaq Divorces, (1985) 14 Anglo-Amer L Rev 363. Young, The Recognition of Extra-Judicial DIvorces, (1987) 7 LS 78. Schiratti v Schiratti (1978) K. L. R 128 Le Mesurier v Le Mesurier (1895) AC 517 Armitage v AG (1906) P 135 Indyka v Indyka (1969) 1AC 33 Re Meyer (1971) P 298Salvesen v Australian Propety administrator (1927) AC 641 Re Edgertons Wills Trust (1956) Ch 593 Duk e of Malborough v AG (1945) Ch 78 make v Cooper (1888) 13 App Cas 88 Callwood v Callwood (1960) AC 659 Harvey v Farnie (1882) 8 App Cas 43 Travers v Holley (1953) P 246 Quazi v Quazi (1980) AC 794 Bater v Bater (1906) P 209 Kendall v Kendall (1971) 1 All ER 378 Merker v Merker (1963) P 283 Re Bankes (1902) 2 Ch 333 Re De Nichols (1900) 2 Ch 410 De Nichols v Curlier (1900) AC 21 (c) Contracts Cheshire, International Contracts (1948). Fletcher, Conflict of Law and European Community Law, Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing Co, Chapter 5.Jaffey, Essential Validity of Contracts in the English Conflicts of Laws, (1974) 23 ICLQ 1 Offer and word sense and Related Questions in the English Conflict of Laws (1975) 24 ICLQ 603 The English comely Law Doctrine and the EEC Convention, (1984) 33 ICLQ 531. Lasok and Stone, Conflict of Laws in the European Community (1987) Abingdon, headmaster Books, Chapter 9. Libling, Formation of International Contracts, (1979) 42 MLR 169. Mann, The comme il faut Law of the Contract, (1950) 3 ICLQ 60 and 597 Proper Law and Illegality in Private International Law (1973) 18 BYIL 97.Morris, The Proper Law of a Contract a Reply, (1950) 3 ILQ 197. North, Varying the Proper Law, in Multum non Multa, Festschrift for Kurt Lipstein (1980), Heidelberg, Muller, p 205. Pierce, Post-Formation Choice of Law in Contract, (1987) 50 MLR 176. Karachi Gas Ltd. v Issaq (1965) E. A. 42 Bonython v Commonwealth of Australia (1951) AC 201 Amin Rasheed Case (Supra) Campagnie DArmement Maritime SA v Cie Tunisienne de Navigation SA (1971) AC 572 Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd v Xenakis (1982) 2 Ll Rep 304 Royal Exchange assertion Corp v Sjofarsakrings Akt Vega (1902) 2 KB 384 The Adriatic (1931) P 241Sayers v International drill Co NV (1971) 3 All ER 163 Rossano v Manufactures Life Assurance Co (1963) 2 QB 352 Coast Lines Ltd v Hudig and Veder Chartering (1972) 2 QB 34 Vita nutriment Products Inc v Unus Shipping Co Ltd (1939) AC 277 The Iran Vojdan (1984) 2 Ll Rep 38 0 The Mariannina (1983) 1 Ll Rep 12 De Dampierre v De Dampierre (1987) 2 All. E. R. 1 (d)Torts Briggs, What Did Boys v Chaplin fix? , (1983) 12 Anglo-Amer L Rev 237. Carter, Torts in English Private International Law, (1981) 52 BYIL 9. Fawcett, Policy Considerations in Tort Choice of Law, (1984) 47 MLR 650.Jaffey, Choice of Law inTort A Justice-Based Approach, (1982) 2 LS 98. Karsten, Chaplin v Boys Another Analysis, (1970) 19 ICLQ 35. Kahn-Freund, Delictual Liability and the Conflict of Laws, (1968) II Recueil des Cours, 5. Law Commission Working Paper No 87, Choice of Law in Tort (1984). Lasok and Stone, Conflict of Laws in European Community (1987) Abingdon, Professional Books, Chapter 9. McGregor, The International Accident problem, (1907) 33 MLR 1. Morris, Torts in the Conflicts of Laws, (1949) 12 MLR 248 The Proper Law of a Tort (1951) 64 Harv L Rev 881.Morse, Torts in Private International Law (1978) Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing Co. North, Contract as a Tort Defence i n the Conflict of Laws, (1977) 26 ICLQ 914. Clarence Smith, Torts and the Conflict of Laws, (1957) 20 MLR 447. The Halley (1868) LR 2 PC 193 Phillips v Eyre (1870) LR 6 QB 1 Machado V Fontes (1897) 2 QB 231 Mclean v Pettigrew (1945) 2 DLR 65 Mackinnon v Iberia Shipping Company (1954) 2 Ll 372 Babcock v Jackson 12 NY 2d 473 Reich v Purcell 432 P 2d 727 Chaplin v Boys (1971) AC 356 church service of Scientology of California v Metropolitan jurisprudence Commr (1976) 120 Sol Jo 690 Coupland v Arabian Gulf Petroleum Co. 1983) 2 All E. R. 434 (e)Succession Re Annesley (1926) Ch 692 Re Ross (1930) 1 Ch 377 Re Cunnington (1924) 1 Ch 68 Re Fergussons Will (1902) 1 Ch 483 Re Price (1900) 1 Ch 442 Re Lewals Settlement Trust (1918) 2 Ch 391 Re Fulds Estate (No 3) (1968) P 675 Re Schnapper (1928) Ch 420 Re Hellmans Will (1866) LR 2 Eq. 363 Re Martin (1900) P 211 Re Miller (1914) 1 Ch 511 Phillip- Stow v IRC (1961) AC 727 Re Collens (1986) Ch 505 Re O Keefe (1940) Ch 124 Law of Succession Act, section 16 (f) Transfer of Property Inter Vivos Davis, Conditional Sales and personal chattel Mortgages in the Conflict of Law, (1964) 13 ICLQ 53.Winkworth v Christie, Manson & Woods Ltd (1980) Ch 496 Adams v Clutterbuck (1883) 10 QBD 403 Re Smith (1916) 2 Ch 206 Bank of Africa Ltd v Cohen (1909) 2 Ch 129 Bank voor Handel en Scheepvart NV v Slatford (1953) 1 QB 248 Hardwick Game Farm v Suffolk Agricultural and Poultry Producers Association (1966) 1 All ER 306 cognizance AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGEMENTS Morris, Ch. 9 Cheshire Ch. 15 Collier Ch. 8 Dicey, Ch. 14 Anton, Ch. 26 . 1. Recognition /Enforcement 2. Enforcement of Judgements in personam a) Action of judgement at Common Law Grant v Easton (1883) 13 Ch. D. 302 (GA) (b)Registration under StatuteForeign Judgements reciprocatory Enforcement Act (Cap 43) Trepca Mines (1960) 1 W. L. R. 1273 at 1282 Rossano v Manufacturers Life Ins. Co. (1963) 2 Q. B. 352 Sidmetal v Titan (1966) 1 Q. B. 828 Black-Clawson v Papierwerke (1975) A. C. 591. 3. Jurisdiction of Foreign Court Buchanan v Rucker (1808) 9 East 193 Sirdar Gurdyal Singh v Rajah of Faridkote (1894) A. C. 670 Emanuel v Symon (1908) 1 K. B. 302, 309. (a)Presence or Residence at time of service of process Carrick v autograph (1895) 12 T. L. R. 59 Blohn v Desser (1962) 2 Q. B. 116 1933 Act s. 4 (2) (a) (iv). b) Residence of companiesLittauer Glove Co. v F. W. Millington (1928) 44 T. L. R. 746 Sfier v National Ins. Co. of N. Z. (1964) 1 L1. R. 330 Vogel v Kohnstamm Ltd. (1973) Q. B. 133 Adams v Cape Industries (1990) 2 W. L. R. 657. (c)Submission to Foreign Courts i) As Plaintiff Schibsby v Westenholtz (1870) L. R. 6 Q. B. 155, 161, or as counterclaimant Cap 43s. 4 (2) (a) (ii). ii) Contract of accordance to Submit Feyerick v Hubbard (1902) 71 L. J. K. B. 509 Cap 43 s. 4 (2) (a) (iii) Copin v Adamson (1874) L. R. 9 Ex. 345 Emanuel v Symon Blohn v Desser Vogel v Kohnstamn. iii) As defendant invoke to the merits Cap 43 s. (2) (a) (iii) Copin v Adamson (18 74) L. R. 9 Ex. 345 Emanuel v Symon Blohn v Desser Vogel v Kohnstamn. (d)Office or Place of Business Cap 43 s. 4 (1) (e) Italframe Ltd vs Mediterranean Shipping Co (1986) KLR 54 Gathuna v African Orthodox Church of Kenya (1982) KLR 356 4. Defence when Foreign Court has Jurisdiction d. (a)Fraud Ochsenbein v Papelier (1893) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 695 Abouloff v Oppenheimer (1882) 10 Q. B. D. 310 Syal v Heyward (1948) 2 K. B. 443 Jet Holdings v Patel (1990) Q. B. 335 House of dancing Gardens v Waite (1990) 3 W. L. R. 347 Cap 43 s. 10(1) (h) . (b)Natural JusticePrice v Dewhurst (1837) 8 Sim. 279 Scarpetta v Lowenfield (1911) 27 T. L. R. 424 Jacobson v Franchon (1927) 138 L. T. 386 Gray v Formosa (1963) P. 259 Lepre v Lepre (1965) P. 52 Adams v Cape Industries (1990) 2 W. L. R. 657 Cap 43 s. 10 (1) (g) c) Public Policy Re Macartney (1921) 1 Ch. 522 Armitage v Nanchen (1983) 4 F. L. R. 293 Phrantzes v Argenti (1960) 2 Q. B. 19 Mayo-Perrot v M-P (1958) Ir. R 336. Cap 43. 4 (1) (a) (v). Israel entailment Bank of N. Y. v Hadjipateras (1983) 3 All E. R. 129. Vervaeke v Smith (1983) 1 A. C. 145 Cap 43 s. 10 (1) (n) 5. Requirements for and Method of Enforcement a)Must be final exam and conclusive Nouvion v Freeman (1889) 15 App. Cas 1 Colt Industries v Sarlie (No. 2) (1966) 1 W. L. R. 1287 Berliner Indusrie Bank v Jost (1971) 2 Q. B. 463 Cap 43 s. 3 (2) (b) (b)Must be for debt or fixed sum Sadler v Robins (1808) 1 Camp. 253. Harrop v H. (1920) 3 K. B. 386 Beatty v B (1924) 1 K. B. 807 Cap 43 s. 3 (2) (a) (c)Must not be for taxes or a penalty Huntington v Attril (1893) A. C. 150 Raulin v Fischer (1911) 2 K. B. 93 Schemmer v Property Resources (1975) Ch. 273 SA Consortium v Sun and Sand (1978) Q. B. 279 U. S. A. v Inkley (1989) Q. B. 255 Cap 43 s. 3 (3) (a)