Tetley (2002) introduction to conflict of laws 5

Private International Law McGill University Faculty of Law

1. INTRODUCTION TO CONFLICT OF LAWS 5

1.1 Four Classic Approaches to Solving Conflict of Laws 5

1.1.1 The First Approach - Single Concepts or Principles 5

1.1.2 The Second Approach - Multiple Numbered Rules (Private Conflict Codes) 7

1.1.3 The Third Approach - General Texts 7

1.1.4 The Fourth Approach - National Legislation/International Conventions 8

2. GENERAL CONFLICT OF LAWS THEORY 8

2.1 A Methodology – The Fifth Approach 8

2.2 Quick Processing of a Choice of Law Problem 9

2.3 General Principles of Conflict of Laws 11

2.3.1 Principle One: Substance & Ancillaries v. Formalities (not Substance v. Procedure) 11

2.3.2 Principle Two: Renvoi 13

2.3.3 Principle Three: Public Order, Public Policy 15

2.3.4 Mandatory Rules (part of Public Order/Policy, has broadened in same way)  term of legal art 18

2.3.5 Obligatory Forum Court Statutes (Tetley terminology) 19

2.3.6 Principle Four: Evasion/Fraude a la loi 20

3. HISTORY AND DEFINITION OF MARITIME LAW 25

3.1 Historical Perspectives on Maritime Law 25

3.1.1 Ius Commune 25

3.1.2 Lex Maritima (U.K.) 25

3.2 General Maritime Law 26

Emporor Antoninus “I indeed am Lord of the World, but the law is lord of the sea. Let it be judged by Rhodian Law, prescribed concerning nautical matters, so far as no one of our laws is opposed” 26

3.2.1 General Maritime Law in Canada 26

3.2.2 General Maritime Law in the US 26

3.2.2.1 Schiffs Leonhardt v. A. Bottachi (1986), AMC 1 (11th Circuit, USA) 27

3.2.3 Other Examples of the General Maritime Law 27

3.3 The Modern Lex Maritima 28

4. A DEFINITION OF CANADIAN MARITIME LAW 29

4.1 Constitutional Questions 29

4.1.1 Issues of Provincial Authority 30

4.1.2 Maritime Conflict Rules – Federal or Provincial? 30

4.2 A Maritime Court 30

4.2.1 Jurisdiction of the Court 30

4.2.1.1 Quebec North Shore Paper v. CP Ltd. [1977] SCC 31

4.2.1.2 Tropwood v. Sivaco Wire & Nale Co[1979] SCC 31

4.2.1.3 Antares Shipping Corporation v. Ship Capricorn [1980] SCC 31

4.2.1.4 Wire Rope Industries of Canada v. BC Marine Shipbuilders [1981] SCC 31

4.2.1.5 Triglav v. Terrasses Jewellers [1983] SCC 32

4.2.2 The Buenos Aires Decision and Canadian Maritime Law 32

4.3 English Admiralty Law 33

4.3.1 Subsequent Broadening of Definition of Canadian Maritime Law 33

4.3.1.1 Ontario AG v. Pembina Explorations [1989] SCC 34

4.3.1.2 Chartwell Shipping [1989] SCC 34

4.3.1.3 Whitbread v. Walley [1990] SCC 34

4.3.1.4 Monk Corporation v. Island Fertilizers [1991] SCC 34

4.3.1.5 Newtern Ltd v. MYS Budyonnogo [1992] FC 34

4.3.1.6 National Bank Leasing v. Merlac Marine [1992] FC 34

4.3.1.7 Northeast Marine Services v. Atlantic Pilotage Authority [1991] FC 34

4.4 A CANADIAN LOOKS AT AMERICAN CONFLICTS OF LAW 35

5. CANADIAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW & CONFLICT OF LAW 36

6. LAW OF THE PERSON/LAW OF THE FLAG 36

6.1 Introduction and Historical Background 36

6.1.1 The Authorities on Law of the Flag 37

6.1.2 Guiding Jurisprudence on the Law of the Flag 37

6.1.2.1 Lauritzen v. Larsen (1953) U.S. S.C. 37

6.1.2.2 Romero v. ITO (1959) U.S. S.C. 38

6.1.2.3 Hellenic Lines v. Rhoditis (1970) U.S. S.C. 39

6.2 Modern Applications – Examples of the Theory and its Weaknesses 39

6.3 Critique of the Law of the Flag 41

6.3.1 Lifting and Piercing the Corporate Veil 41

7. CONTRACT (BILLS OF LADING) 42

7.1 Introduction to Contracts in General 42

7.1.1 Express Choice - Party Autonomy 42

7.1.2 Essential (Material) and Formal Validity 43

7.1.3 Capacity 43

7.1.4 Depeçage 44

7.1.5 Escape Clauses (Escape Hatches) 44

7.2 Bills of Lading 44

7.2.1 Hague Rules, Hague/Visby Rules & Hamburg Rules 45

7.2.1.1 Sunds Defibrator Inc. et Al v. The M/V Atlantic Star, 1986 AMC 268. 46

7.2.1.2 Daval Steel v. Acadia Forest 46

7.2.1.3 Associated Metals & Minerals v. M/V Lumbe, 1993 AMC 700. 46

7.2.2 Various Conflict of Law Theories and Bills of Lading 47

7.2.3 Negotiation of Bills of Lading 47

7.2.3.1 Vita Food Products Ltd. v. Unus Shipping Co. Ltd., 1939 48

7.2.4 US Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA), 1936 48

8. CONTRACT (MARINE INSURANCE) 49

8.1 The Substantive Domestic Law of Marine Insurance 49

8.2 Conflicts and the Marine Insurance Contract 50

8.2.1 Contacts Used to Discover the Properly Applicable Law (Robert Merkin) 51

8.3 Reinsurance 52

8.3.1.1 Citadel Ins. Co. v. Atlantic Union, [1982] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 543. 53

8.4 Direct Action 53

8.4.1.1 Ruby S.S. v. Johnson and Ruby S.S. v. Commercial Union Assurance (1927, 1933) 55

8.4.1.2 Edinburgh Assurance Company v. R.L. Burns Corp (1980) 56

9. TORT (COLLISION) 59

9.1 Torts & Delicts in General 59

9.2 General Rules for Choice of Law in Tort/Delict 59

9.2.1 England & Double Actionability 59

9.2.1.1 Phillips v Eyre (1870) 6 QB 1. 59

9.2.2 Canada (Common Law) 60

9.2.2.1 Tolofson v. Jensen, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1022. – p.47 and 200 CB 61

9.2.2.2 Gagnon v. Lucas, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1022. – p.47 CB 61

9.2.2.3 Tetley "New Development In Private International Law: Tolofson v. Jensen and Gagnon v. Lucas" American Journal of Comparative Law: vol. 44. CB p. 18 62

9.2.2.4 Orden v. Grail [1998] S.C.R. 437. 63

9.2.3 Quebec 65

9.2.4 Australia 65

9.2.5 United States 65

9.2.5.1 Lauritzen v. Larsen (1953) (US) 66

9.2.5.2 Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co (1959) 66

9.2.5.3 Hellenic Lines v. Rhoditis (1970) 66

9.2.6 Louisiana 67

9.2.7 France 67

9.3 Tort & Depecage 67

9.4 Tort & Contract 68

9.5 Maritime Torts/Delicts & Collision 68

9.5.1 Torts/Delicts & Ships 68

9.5.2 Reports & Rules on Maritime Collision 69

10. PRESUMPTIONS (PROOF & AN ANCILLARY) 73

10.1.1 Civil Law 73

10.1.2 Common Law 73

10.2 Presumptions in Maritime Law 73

10.2.1 Liability for Collisions 74

10.2.2 United States and Presumptions in Maritime Law 74

10.2.2.1 The Pennsylvania Rule, 1874 74

10.2.2.2 ISK v. USA, 510 F. 2d 875, 1975 AMC 287 (9 Cir. 1975) 76

11. DIVISION OF DAMAGES (AN ANCILLARY) 77

11.1 Three Methods of Apportioning Damages 77

11.2 Division of Damages and National Approaches 78

11.2.1 United Kingdom 78

11.2.2 Canada 78

11.2.2.1 Bow Valley Husky v. St. John Shipbuilding, [1997] 3 SCR 1210. 78

11.2.2.2 Ordon Estate v. Grail [1998] 3 S.C.R. 437 79

11.2.3 United States 80

11.2.3.1 United States v. Reliable Transfer Co., 421 U.S. 397. 80

11.2.4 France 81

11.3 Innocent Third Vessels 81

11.4 Division of Collision Damages – The Conflict Problems 82

11.4.1 Division of Collision Damages and Conflicts – U.S. 82

11.4.2 Division of Damages and Applicable law 83

11.4.2.1 Anglo-American Grain Co. v. The S/T Mina D’Amour (1959, U.S. District Crt.) 83

12. DAMAGES & MEASURE OF DAMAGES (AN ANCILLARY) 84

12.1 Damages in Contract 84

12.2 Damages in Tort & Economic Loss 84

12.2.1 France 84

12.2.2 United Kingdom 84

12.2.3 United States 85

12.2.4 Australia 86

12.2.5 Quebec 86

12.2.6 Canada 86

12.3 Damages & Conflict of Laws 87

12.4 Currency of the Judgment 88

12.4.1 United Kingdom 88

12.4.2 Canada 88

12.4.3 United States 88

12.4.4 France 88

12.4.5 European Union 88

12.5 Date of Conversion for Purpose of Enforcement (see general national laws above) 88

12.6 Interest 89

12.6.1 Civil Law, Common Law & Admiralty 89

12.6.2 Rate of Interest 89

12.6.3 Conflict of Laws & Interest 90

13. OBLIGATORY FORUM COURT STATUTES (SHIPOWNERS’ LIMITATIONS) 90

13.1 Limitations in the Common and Civil Law 90

13.2 Conflict Problems & Solutions 90

13.2.1 Conflict Directives in International Limitation Conventions 91

13.2.2 National Laws 92

13.2.3 Conflict Limitation Cases 93

13.2.3.1 Bethlehem Steel, 1978 93

13.2.3.2 Arctic Explorer, 1984 AMC 2413. 94

13.2.3.3 The M/V Swiborn, 1984 95

13.2.3.4 "The Lady Gwendolen" [1965] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 335 CA 95

13.2.3.5 Rhone (The) v. Peter A.B. Widener (The) [1993] 1 S.C.R. 497   95

13.2.3.6 N.V. Bureau Wijsmuller v. "Tojo Maru" [1971] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 341 HL 96

13.2.3.7 Caltex Singapore v. BP Shipping Ltd. [1996] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 286 QBD (Adm Ct) 97

13.2.3.8 The 'Happy Fellow' [1997] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 130 QBD (Adm Ct) 97

14. CHOICE OF JURISDICTION 98

14.1 General Principles of Jurisdiction 98

14.1.1 Common Law & Civil Law 98

14.1.2 General Principles in Maritime Law 99

14.1.3 Reasons for Refusing Jurisdiction 99

14.1.4 Forum non conveniens 100

14.1.4.1 The Arctic Explorer, 590 F. Supp 1346 (US District Crt, Southern District Texas, 1984) 101

14.1.5 Forum conveniens 101

14.1.6 Forum Shopping 101

14.1.6.1 The Sky Reefer (U.S. Supr. Crt., 1995) 101

14.2 International Conventions on Jurisdiction 102

15. RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS 103

15.1 Basic Principles 104

15.1.1 Procedure: 104

15.1.2 Full Faith & Credit 104

15.1.2.1 Morguard Investment v. De Savoye 1990 3 S.C.R. 1077 104

15.2 Grounds for Refusing to Recognize 105

15.3 International Conventions 106

Principles of Conflict 109