Legal Literature detail
|Directive article||Reference||Criminal Law and Justice Weekly, 2011, volume 175, chapter 22, page 322 344|
|Country||United Kingdom||Legal Literature date||2011|
|Author||V. SMITH||Author initial|
|Title EN||The causation shift: part 2||URL EN||N/A|
|Keywords||harmonisation, judicial recourse, national law, proof of negligence|
This article is the second part of a two part article focusing on the causation test under the UCP directive and its English implementation. It discusses the causation test set out in the Office of Fair Trading v Purely Creative Limited first instance decision.
The article considers the tests for causation under the UCP Directive to be inconsistent with the general test for causation under English law.
The article concludes that the UCP Directive has threatened some of the certainty of the local law and argues that harmonisation of member states will not be possible if the UCP Directive is interpreted inconsistently by the different EU member states.