London litigation post-Brexit

Brexit-related uncertainties have the capacity to damage London’s status as a global centre for litigation, the president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association (LSLA) has said.

Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Crosse warns that other litigation hubs are already seeking to capitalise on the referendum result. Crosse says: “It is vital that as a profession we work to meet that head on.”

He says the reasons for London’s popularity remain “almost entirely intact”—a record of impartiality, its commercial judiciary, its legal talent and the fact its legal system is attuned to the realities of international commerce and finance. Moreover, English contract law is likely to continue to be widely used.

On choice of law, Crosse says the courts of EU member states will still be bound by choice of law in accordance with the Rome I and Rome II Regulations, and there is no reason why the UK should not adopt the same approach. This would “ensure continuity and certainty on which law will apply”.

Since the issues facing the London litigation market are unlikely to be high-priority for the government, however, it is “incumbent on lawyers (and the judiciary) to defend the UK’s position and our clients, by reaching a consensus on what needs to be done as soon as possible, and then presenting to the government any steps it needs to take”. For example, Crosse suggests that an early statement from the government that it intends to sign the Hague Convention as soon as the UK leaves the EU would ensure that “a fall-back position is established in choice of jurisdiction and the enforceability of English judgments in Europe” and would “reduce the risk of commercial parties switching dispute resolution clauses that would see future disputes heard in Paris, Frankfurt or Amsterdam”.