Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:04:00.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

International Torts and Choice of Law in Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 January 2003

Get access

Extract

In John Pfeiffer Pty. Ltd. v. Rogerson (2000) 201 C.L.R. 552, the High Court of Australia had reconsidered the choice of law rules for “intra-national torts”, i.e. torts involving elements occurring in more than one Australian state. There, the Court rejected the rule of double actionability derived from Phillips v. Eyre (1870) L.R. 6 Q.B. 1 in preference for the rule that all questions of substance should be governed by the lex loci delicti. In Régie National des Usines Renault v. Zhang (2002) 187 A.L.R. 1, the High Court was asked to extend this preference to international torts as well. It did so emphatically. Except as regards a limited number of specific torts, for which the Court expressly reserved its consideration, the Australian common law rule is now that the substantive elements of tort actions are to be determined in accordance with the law of the place of the act or omission giving rise to the action.

Type
Case and Comment
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)