Sie befinden Sich nicht im Netzwerk der Universität Paderborn. Der Zugriff auf elektronische Ressourcen ist gegebenenfalls nur via VPN oder Shibboleth (DFN-AAI) möglich. mehr Informationen...
Cambridge law journal, 2021-03, Vol.80 (1), p.32-35
Ort / Verlag
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
Erscheinungsjahr
2021
Link zum Volltext
Quelle
Alma/SFX Local Collection
Beschreibungen/Notizen
As 'Patel v Mirza' [2016] UKSC 42, [2017] A.C. 467 continues to revolutionise the law on illegality, the question arises whether its range-of-factors test will project its influence over more decidedly "foreign" terrain: foreign law illegality, or illegality under a law other than the 'lex contractus'. Foreign law illegality disputes have typically centred around the rules in Foster v Driscoll [1929] 1 K.B. 470, which renders contracts unenforceable if parties' "real object and intention" was to contravene a third state's law; and 'Ralli Brothers v Compania Naviera Sota y Aznar' [1920] 2 K.B. 287, which renders contracts unenforceable if illegal under the 'lex loci solutionis'. Although both Foster and Ralli are manifestations of English "public policy", they have never been associated directly with domestic illegality, instead having their "root" in the principle of "comity" (Toprak 'Mahsulleri Ofisi v Finagrain Compagnie Commerciale Agricole Et Financiere S.A'. [1979] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 98, 107). Today, Foster and Ralli continue to crop up in English courts (e.g. 'Dana Gas PJSC v Dana Gas Sukuk Ltd'. [2017] EWHC 2928 (Comm)) and throughout the Commonwealth (e.g. 'Ryder Industries Ltd. v Chan Shui Woo' [2015] HKCFA 85, [2016] 1 HKC 323; 'Teng Wen-Chung v EFG Bank A.G'. [2018] SGCA 60, [2018] 2 S.L.R. 1145), seemingly insulated from the sea changes occurring in domestic illegality.