Richard Fentiman – författare

How foreign law is established, and whether it must be relied upon at all, are central issues in private international law, with important implications in principle and in practice. Whether litigants are free to ignore the foreign elements in a dispute goes to the heart of the conflicts process, and without effective means to establish the content of foreign law the object of that process is undermined. The cost and unpredictability of establishing foreign law also have an important impact on litigation, affecting the parties' choice of forum, and how cases are argued and decided.This book, the first detailed examination of the topic in English law, is an account of the pleading and proof of foreign law from an English perspective, which also places the law in a comparative context, and considers options for reform. It provides a practical guide to the subject, but also presents the conflicts process in a way which is both novel and illuminating. Recognized as the leading account of the subject, this book is the first point of reference for both scholars and practitioners. It is frequently cited with approval in the courts, in England and elsewhere, notably in leading cases such as MCC v Bishopsgate Investments (1998, Court of Appeal), Shaker v Al Bedrawi (Court of Appeal, 2002), and Neilson v Overseas Projects Corporation (High Court of Australia, 2005).

The new edition of this highly regarded work has been fully updated to reflect current trends and concerns in commercial litigation practice. It considers the many significant changes in the law since the first edition, and how they affect both the structure and drafting of commercial transactions, and the strategic choices of litigants. It includes extensive treatment of the recast Brussels I Regulation, which takes effect from January 2015, and which will significantly affect the handling of cross-border disputes. It offers extended analysis of important recent decisions including VTB v Nutritek, The Alexandros T, and Star Reefers v JFC. The book is a definitive account of the law and practice of international commercial litigation in the English courts, which describes the present state of the law, and articulates its underlying principles. It is intended to be of value to both specialist and non-specialist practitioners, and, by setting the principles of private international law in a practical context, to scholars in the field. The book offers an account of the subject which is comprehensive, and sophisticated in its analysis, but firmly grounded in addressing the challenges and concerns facing practitioners. The role of commercial litigation is examined, not merely in the resolution of disputes, but as an aspect of commercial practice. A feature of the book is its focus on evolving areas of practice, and issues of difficulty, with an emphasis on problematic decisions, and recent legislative changes. Particular emphasis is placed on how the principles established by the higher courts are applied in the Commercial Court. Where the law is uncertain or controversial, the rival arguments are examined and solutions considered. Emphasis is given to the impact of litigation on cross-border transactions, and its effect on legal risk. Mechanisms for managing the risks associated with cross-border litigation are extensively discussed, with particular emphasis on the drafting of effective jurisdiction and governing law clauses.The first edition was highly regarded and was cited with approval by the courts in a number of key decisions including Blue Sky One Ltd v Mahan Air (March 2010), Royal & Sun Alliance plc v Rolls Royce plc (July 2010), Sebastian Holdings Inc v Deutsche Bank AG (Aug 2010, Court of Appeal), Glacier Reinsurance AG & v Gard Marine & Energy Ltd (Oct 2010, Court of Appeal), Faraday Reinsurance Co Ltd v Howden North America Inc (Nov 2011, Commercial Court), Mauritius Commercial Bank Ltd v Hestia Holdings Ltd (May 2013, Commercial Court), Antonio Gramsci v Lembergs (June 2013, Court of Appeal), and The Alexandros T (6 Nov 2013, Supreme Court).