WALL V MUTUELLE DE POITIERS ASSURANCES

[2013] EWHC 53 (QB), Queen's Bench Division, Mr Justice Tugendhat, 25 January 2013

Tort - Claimant injured in France but bringing action in England - Whether admissibility of expert evidence determined by English law or French law -European Parliament and Council Regulation 864/2007/EC, the Rome II Regulation, articles 1 and 15

The claimant sustained severe personal injuries in a motor accident in France in July 2010. The claimant returned to England and commenced proceedings against the driver's motor liability insurers (the defendants), in accordance with European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001. It was not disputed that the collision occurred as a result of the negligence of the driver. At the time of the accident the claimant was self-employed, and he wished to introduce employment or accountancy expert evidence. The question was whether the admissibility of expert evidence was determined by English law as the law of the forum, as provided for by article 1.3 of the Rome II Regulation, European Parliament and Council Regulation 864/2007/EC, or by French law as the law governing the substance of the claim under article 15(c) of the Rome II Regulation, which applies the law of the tort to "the existence, the nature and the assessment of damage or the remedy claimed". The court held that the issue was one of evidence and procedure rather than damages, and accordingly expert evidence was admissible in accordance with English law.