1. 1973 Convention on Law Applicable to Products Liability
12/4/2018
1973 Convention on Law Applicable to Products Liability
Subject of my speech is could this Convention be a way of obtaining generous US damages also outside the US?
4 December, 2018
Advokaterna Liman & Partners

2. Advokaterna Liman & Partners
12/4/2018
Signatory States
Croatia, Finland, France, Luxemburg, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Macedonia
Entered into force Oct
Belgium, Italy and Portugal have signed but not ratified the Convention.
Advokaterna Liman & Partners

3. Convention determines in particular
12/4/2018
Convention determines in particular
Basis and extent of liability
Grounds for exemption,limitation and division of liability
Kinds of damage
Form of compensation and its extent
Liability of principals and employers
Burden of proof
Rules of prescription and limitation
Article 8
If US law would be applicable its not only damage law but other plaintiff obstacles like GARA and Federal Preemption
Advokaterna Liman & Partners

4. Advokaterna Liman & Partners
12/4/2018
Articles 4-7,
Art 4, law of place of injury if
a) Also habitual place of residence of victim or
b) Principal place of business of defendant or
c) Place where the product was acquired by victim
Need 2 designated contact for article to apply
I use word victim, right definition is ”person directly suffering damage” the person first to suffer damage, example son sues for death of father wrongful death action (father is person directly suffering damage) so its fathers residence which is relevant
Residence of victim, legal persons unclear principal residence or residence of a branch
Acquired = took physical posession of the product, irrespective of the acquisition of legal title
Advokaterna Liman & Partners

5. Art 5, law of residence of victim if
12/4/2018
Art 5, law of residence of victim if
a) Also principal place of business of defendant or
b) Place where the product was acquired by victim
Advokaterna Liman & Partners

6. Advokaterna Liman & Partners
12/4/2018
If Art 4-5 don´t apply
Art 6 gives claimant choice between
Law State of principal place of business of defendant or
Law State of place of injury
This is of course where it becomes interesting from a claimants point of view.
If you have an aviation accident where law suit is brought to a signatory State, like France or Spain and where the place of injury and residence of victims are not the same a US manufacturer could face application of US law even outside US courts.
US is not even signatory to the Convention, doesnt have to be. Convention applies anyway
Advokaterna Liman & Partners

7. Advokaterna Liman & Partners
12/4/2018
Application
Midair collision Uberlingen, July 1, 2002
Court of First Instance Barcelona, Spain, May 2009
Spanair JKK 5022, Madrid-Barajas,
August 20, 2008
Air France AF 447, June 1, 2009
Midair crash between a Bashkirian Airlines Tupolev 154 and a DHL 757 Cargo plane over Germany. Crash caused by conflicting instruction
Bashkirian families sued manufacturer of the TCAS Honeywell and ACSS District Ct of New Jerseyin. Case dismissed on FNC to Barcelona Spain.
Convention applies, art 4-5 not applicable, art 6 points towards US Law.
Proceedings in May this year, still no verdict.
Spanair, convention applicable for non Spanish victims
Air France, over international waters, art 4 not applicable, article 5 only governs french victims against for instance airbus
Were 155 foreign passengers onboard, art 6 applies and US law applicable
Advokaterna Liman & Partners

8. Advokaterna Liman & Partners
12/4/2018
Concludes my seminar.
You are wondering would a spanish judge in Barcelona really apply full US damages? The convention says so and the verdict in Bashkirian will soon tell.
How will this effect future claimshandling and insurance premiums?
Passenger claims form convention states will be worth more in some situations, insurance premiums for airlines based in these countries should expect a raise of premiums.
Advokaterna Liman & Partners