The greater part of this book shadows those chapters of Dicey & Morris on The Conflict of Laws (12th edn, 1993) which have particular relevance to commercial litigation. There is therefore to be found an account of the law relating to jurisdiction and foreign judgments (Chaps 2–9); choice of law in contracts, general and specific, (Chaps 10–12), choice of law for torts (Chap. 13) and questions of procedure, limitation and currency (Chaps 14, 15 and 21–23). Given the fact that there is a new Dicey, which has a status in the subject which is well known, how, one may ask, does this enterprise justify itself?

Well, in part by reference to the further material, of which more below. But otherwise in two fundamental ways. First, by making the material rather more quickly discoverable than is always the way with Dicey. It will have escaped the attention of few that the Rule-and-Commentary approach of Dicey has latterly come under increasing strain. This derives from the fact that the law on jurisdiction (to take one example) has become so highly synthetic that a sequential set of Rules-and-Exceptions, brilliantly fashioned to state the common law, struggles to accommodate the inelegant and fractured complexity of the modern law. Then again, certain areas have become so statutorily prescriptive that the Dicey Rule is reduced to paraphrasing (albeit often improving upon, as is the case, e.g., with choice of law for insurance contracts) the statutory provisions which now make up the law. By contrast, Hill adopts a more familiar organizational strategy, which allows the reader to pick his way through the primary material more directly, rather than dealing with it by its domestication within a second(ary) set of Rules. It works pretty well, even if the system of automatic paragraph-numbering, relentlessly logical as it is, can require considerable concentration on the part of the reader. The exact position in the hierarchy of paragraph 11.2.3.3.3.4 is identifiable from its label, and it is valuable to be able to know this. But…

Second, the substance. With so much new law to deal with, it is good to have another point of view to consult. On the whole it is pretty good. Taking the Brussels Convention material as a test case, the treatment of the law is sound and clear, tending to prefer orthodoxy to adventurism. Where there are problems still awaiting their resolution, these are analysed with even-handedness. It is unfair to pick out particular points as needing more attention than they were given, but a couple do deserve a word. For one, there does appear to be a gap in the coverage where the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 should be. For a variety of reasons there appears in practice to be a growing awareness of the multi-faceted problem which will arise where a defendant wishes to make a claim for contribution or indemnity against another. Indeed, most professional negligence cases appear to