According to the figures issued by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys during January to June, 1981, more than 24,000 British nationals and United Kingdom residents (of more than one year residence) left the U.K. to live in the Middle East. Only emigrants to Australia, EEC countries and the United States were more than those who went to work or settle in the Middle East. At the same time it should be noted that life expectancy at birth in the Middle East stands at 39 years (as opposed to 69 years in U.K.) and only in Israel and also exceptionally in Kuwait and Lebanon reaches 69 and 65 respectively.

The general Anglo-American rule is that when a civil wrong has been committed in another country and the action comes before an English, Scottish or American court it must be shown that the claim is actionable both by the law of the other country and by the English, Scottish, or American law as appropriate. By way of illustration, in the Scottish case of MacKinnon v. Iberia S.S. Co. [1955] S.C. 20; [1955] S.L.T. 49 an engineer who had been injured through the negligence of his employers on board a British ship lying at anchor within the jurisdiction of the Republic of San Domingo could not recover in the Court of Session a type of damages which were recoverable under Scots law but not under the law of San Domingo. Thus, where a British or American subject has sustained loss and injury in a Middle East country and then sues for damages in Britain or the U.S., the laws of negligence in that part of the Middle East must be proved as a fact, usually by leading an expert witness.

In view of the lower standard of medical care in the Middle East it is important that an injured person has been held entitled to expenditures incurred for medical treatment as a private patient (despite the availability of free medical service either under the national health service in the Middle East or under the employers special scheme). This is specified in s. 2(4) of the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948. Furthermore, the injured person can also choose to leave his place of employment in the host country, seeking the very best possible medical or surgical attention that can be obtained elsewhere, usually outside the entire Middle East. This has been established as early as Winkworth v. Hubbard [1960] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 150, in which a Canadian injured in Monaco received medical expenses incurred in the U.S.

Certain English cases such as Boys v. Chaplin [1969] 2 All E.R. 1085 favour the American rule of “governmental interest analysis” to problems of choice of law in tort.