Breaking News: The judgment is here! An important decision for cross-border cases
Learn how the principle of Forum Non Conveniens will be applied in England & Wales post-Brexit following the judgment in the case of Moore v MACIF.
The judgment in the case of Moore v MACIF considers the application of the principle of Forum Non Conveniens in cases where claimants domiciled in England are injured abroad and wish to bring a claim in the English courts after Brexit.
The claimants, Mr and Mrs Moore, were domiciled and habitually resident in England. They were injured following a road traffic accident in France in October 2018. They brought a claim against the French motor insurer, MACIF, in England after the Brexit deadline.
When considering whether England was the appropriate forum in which to bring the claims, HHJ Hellman referred to the case of Spiliada Maritime Corp v Cansulex Ltd and noted that as these were ‘service out’ claims, the burden of proof was on the claimants to not only show that England was the appropriate forum but that it was clearly so. Both parties referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in FS Cairo (Nile Plaza) v Lady Brownlie.
Weighing up the arguments, HHJ Hellman was not satisfied that England was clearly the more appropriate forum.
The judgment provides guidance on how the principle of Forum Non Conveniens will be approached in the courts of England & Wales following Brexit.
For more information on the principle of Forum Non Conveniens, contact our cross-border solicitors.
