(Australia) There had been a negligent failure in New South Wales to warn a pregnant woman of the dangers of taking the drug thalidimide.
Held: When looking at jurisdiction to hear a complaint of a tort, the court should look to where in substance the tort was committed. Lord Pearson said: ‘It is not the right approach to say that, because there was no complete tort until the damage occurred, therefore the cause of action arose wherever the damage happened to occur. The right approach is, when the tort is complete, to look back over the series of events constituting it and ask the question: where in substance did this cause of action arise?’
and it was ‘manifestly just and reasonable that a defendant should have to answer for his wrongdoing in the country where he did the wrong’.
Judges:
Lord Pearson, Lord Reid, Lord Morris, Lord Upjohn, Lord Donovan
Citations:
[1971] AC 458, [1971] UKPC 3, [1971] 1 All ER 694, [1971] 2 WLR 441
Links:
Statutes:
New South Wales Common Law Procedure Act 1899 18(4)
Cited by:
Cited – Ashton Investments Ltd. and Another v OJSC Russian Aluminium (Rusal) and others ComC 18-Oct-2006
The claimants sought damages for breach of confidence saying that the defendants had hacked into their computer systems via the internet to seek privileged information in the course of litigation. The defendants denied this and said the courts had . .
Cited – VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and Others SC 6-Feb-2013
The claimant bank said that it had been induced to create very substantial lending facilities by fraudulent misrepresentation by the defendants. They now appealed against findings that England was not clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other, Jurisdiction, Commonwealth
Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.245757