<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">388045124</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180307125035.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">161130e199801  xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1017/S0020589300061625</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">S0020589300061625</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">pii</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)cambridge-10.1017/S0020589300061625</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Rodger</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Barry J.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">Ascertaining the Statutory Lex Loci Delicti: Certain Difficulties Under the Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[Barry J. Rodger]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">The Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 introduced major reform to the common law choice of rule in delict/tort under Scots/English law respectively. To all intents and purposes, and in the face of sustained and strong criticism, the Act abandoned the common law rules based on double actionability with exceptions. The primary rule under the statute would appear to state that the applicable law is to be based on the general concept of the lex loci delicti. It is of some significance for the analysis here that the statute does not in fact utilise that Latin expression as it is indeed unclear that the expression has any technical meaning. Indeed, the provisions of the Act seek, but in the end fail, to achieve a greater degree of certainty than that rather nebulous though &quot;right-minded” concept. Significantly, a principal objective of the reforms was to ensure that the lex fori no longer played a primary role in choice of law for delictual/tortious claims in private international law. Of course, doubts remain as to the likelihood of direct resort to the lex fori via potential escape devices provided for in the Act The two most likely stages for this arise during characterisation and later when the lex fori may be applied qua public policy.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Copyright © British Institute of International and Comparative Law 1998</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">International and Comparative Law Quarterly</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Cambridge University Press</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">47/1(1998-01), 205-211</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0020-5893</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">47:1&lt;205</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">1998</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">47</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">ILQ</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589300061625</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589300061625</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">100</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Rodger</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Barry J.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">International and Comparative Law Quarterly</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Cambridge University Press</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">47/1(1998-01), 205-211</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0020-5893</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">47:1&lt;205</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">1998</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">47</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">ILQ</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="b">CC0</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="986" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">SWISSBIB</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">350969108</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-cambridge</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
