Abstract
The reformed choice of law in tort rules contained in the Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 have proved a source of great controversy. This piece attempts to show that there are wider concerns fuelled by the Act. It seeks to demonstrate that one can not reform one area of the Conflict of Laws (such as choice of law in tort) in isolation from other areas (such as jurisdiction in tortious matters and choice of law in contract) and to illustrate the unsatisfactory state that the statutory reforms have had on these other areas. The analysis of the problems generated by the Act may be used as a model for a far more fundamental proposition: namely that the tendency to regard choice of law and jurisdiction as separate areas throughout the Conflict of Laws, rather than as combining to form a coherent law of international litigation, is a critical shortcoming of the study of the subject.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
