Contribution and Indemnification among Joint Tortfeasors in Multi-State Conflict Cases: A Study of Doctrine and the Current Law in the US and under the Rome II Regulation
Journal of Private International Law (JPrivIntL) Volume 4, Issue 2, p. 237-277, 2008
Posted: 22 Jun 2017 Last revised: 23 Jun 2017
Date Written: 2008
The primary purpose of this article is to illustrate the problems of determining the applicable law in contribution cases with particular regard to the new provisions in the Rome II Regulation. The present author does not undertake to give definitive answers to all questions on how contribution conflicts should be handled. Instead, and in view of the manifold interests at play in contribution conflicts cases, this article is designed to comment on some fundamentals underlying multi-state conflict cases among joint tortfeasors. Prior to an analysis of European law, a closer look across the Atlantic is warranted: US conflicts law has a long history of choice-of-law discussions on the issue of contribution. Its traditional analysis of the interests involved, especially of the “party expectations” as regards the applicable law in contribution conflicts, can therefore provide insightful arguments for the European discussion. A comparison of the US and the European discussion, and an analysis of the public policy and party interests will explain some of the new Regulation’s shortcomings and suggest an alternative approach for contribution conflicts. Finally it is necessary to have a look at the effect of joint tortfeasors’ common habitual residence or domicile and the values of an escape clause in contribution conflicts cases.
Keywords: Choice of Law, Conflicts Law, Contribution, Indemnification, Rome II Regulation, US Conflicts Law
JEL Classification: K13, K15, K22, K33
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation