Laurette Barnard, 1996
This article presents a detailed analysis of the way in which New Zealand courts determine the objective proper law of a contract in the absence of a choice by the parties. With reference to case law, the author argues that the current practice of determining such proper law on the basis of the “closest and most real connection” test does not translate into certainty and predictability and does not serve the goals of commercial convenience and business efficacy. The author proposes the development of a set of coherent presumptions, or rules subject to flexible exceptions, for each kind of contract.
Elsabe Schoeman, 2011
The Rome II Regulation deals with choice of law in tort. The article examines the value of this Regulation vis-à-vis third (non-EU Anglo-Common law) countries, analysing the unique EU environment and the continuous movement towards uniformity and certainty. The author discusses the general choice of law regime laid down in Article 4 of the Regulation and applies it to two famous Anglo-Common law cases: Neilson v Overseas Projects Corporation of Victoria Ltd and Harding v Wealands, concluding that these cases would probably have been decided differently under Rome II. The article concludes that Rome II may indeed have comparative value for these third countries and that its importance should not be underestimated.