Boys v Chaplin
Under the old common law rule of double actionability, a tort committed abroad was actionable in England only if actionable under both English law and the law of the place of the wrong, subject to a flexible exception.
Facts
Mr Boys and Mr Chaplin, both British servicemen stationed in Malta, were involved in a road accident there, in which Mr Boys was injured by Mr Chaplin's negligent driving. Under the law of Malta, Mr Boys could recover only his financial loss, which was very small, but under English law he could also recover damages for pain and suffering. He sued in England.
Legal principle
The House of Lords held that he could recover damages for pain and suffering in accordance with English law. The majority applied the rule in Phillips v Eyre, under which an act done abroad is actionable as a tort in England only if it is actionable as a tort under English law and is not justifiable by the law of the place where it was done, but differed in their reasoning. Lord Wilberforce said that the general rule should be applied with some flexibility, so that a particular issue between the parties could be governed by the law of the country which, with respect to that issue, had the most significant relationship with the occurrence and the parties. Since both parties were British and only temporarily in Malta, English law should govern. The common law rule was largely replaced by the Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 and later by the Rome II Regulation.
Related cases on choice of law in contract and tort
- Amin Rasheed Shipping Corp v Kuwait Insurance Co [1984] AC 50
- Cox v Ergo Versicherung AG [2014] UKSC 22, [2014] AC 1379
- Foster v Driscoll [1929] 1 KB 470
- Harding v Wealands [2006] UKHL 32, [2007] 2 AC 1
- Ingmar GB Ltd v Eaton Leonard Technologies Inc Case C-381/98, [2000] ECR I-9305
- Libyan Arab Foreign Bank v Bankers Trust Co [1989] QB 728
- Ralli Brothers v Compañía Naviera Sota y Aznar [1920] 2 KB 287
- Red Sea Insurance Co Ltd v Bouygues SA [1995] 1 AC 190
Studying conflict of laws? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
