GIMPA FACULTY OF LAW

Conflict of Law/Private International Law

Conflict of laws/Private International Law is that part of Ghanaian law which comes into
operation whenever we are confronted by a legal problem which has a foreign element.
Foreign elements can be of many kinds. For example, a contract may be made in Mali; it may
require delivery of goods to Tema. An accident may occur as a result of negligence in
Ouagadougou: the driver comes from Nigeria, the injured from Burkina Faso and they wish
to pursue litigation in a Ghanaian court. An English woman has gone through a ceremony of
marriage in Nigeria; the marriage is in polygamous form and she subsequently discovers
her ‘husband’ has two other wives. She wants to know her status: is she married or not and
is her marriage polygamous or monogamous? If he attempts to divorce her using a method
acceptable within his religion (the talaq), she wants to know what effect this will have in
England. These are just a few examples of foreign elements. In addition, this course will
seek to provide an understanding of conflicts arising out of the plural legal system in Ghana
and how these may be resolved. In Ghana, as in many African and other countries, we have
different customary laws; we have customary law and statute law; we have secular law and
religious law, etc. These different laws conflict at times and this course will point to the
rules that may be used to resolve such conflicts.

Conflict of Law I: This course has a general part, which is taught in the first semester: This
will consist of: Introduction to the Conflict of Laws-Definition, Nature, and Scope; Concept
and Meaning of Domicile/Nationality/Residence; Jurisdiction; Foreign Law-Proof of Foreign
Law, Exclusion of Applicable Foreign Law; and Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
Judgments and Foreign Arbitral Awards.

Conflict of Law II will focus on the conflict of law rules governing specific areas in the
conflict of law. There will be a particular focus on the conflict of law rules governing
transactions in the area of Tort, Contract, Property Law, Succession, Trusts; and Family Law.

General readings:
Collier, Conflict of Laws: Third Edition
Cheshire & North: Private International Law (earlier editions)
Dicey & Morris: The Conflict of Law (earlier editions)
Morris: The Conflict of Law, 8th Edition (edited by David Mcclean and Veronica Abou-Nigm)
Grading:
50%: An examination consisting of three short answer questions and twenty multiple
choice questions.

40%: A mid-semester exam and a scoring in class quiz in either the ninth or the tenth
week.

10%: Participation – particularly in weekly class panels

Attendance
Attendance at all classes is mandatory. In accordance with GIMPA practice, the attendance
sheet will be collected 30 minutes after the start of classes.

Course Coordinator: Victor Brobbey

Contact: vbrobbey@gmail.com, vbrobbey@gimpa.edu.gh
Office: GLS Room 12 (Old Secretariat)
Office Hours: Tuesday 3-4 (or by email appointment)

Topic Readings
Introduction to Conflict of Law: 1. Richard Frimpong Oppong, “Private
Session Definition, Nature & Scope International Law in Africa: The Past,
1 Present and Future”, 55 Am. J. Comp. L. 677.
By the end of this class, 2. Cheshire and North’s Private International
students should be able to: Law (13th ed), Chapter 1, especially pp. 3-14
 state the three (or corresponding pages in any later
questions that are edition).
asked by ‘conflict of Cases:
laws’ 1. King V. Elliot [1972] 1 GLR 54.
 define what is meant by 2. Youhanna V.Abboud [1974] 2 GLR 201.
foreign law 3. Wittaker V. Choirteram [1971] 2 GLR 267.
 begin to use the
concepts and language
of conflict of laws
appropriately
 Understand the
distinction between
substantive rules and
procedural rules in CoL

Domicile, Nationality & 1. Cheshire & North, Private International Law

Session 2 (13th ed), p. 133 177
Residence
2. Morris, Conflict of Laws (5th ed) p. 23 -46
Session 3 Domicile: Continued; 3. Morris & North, Cases and Materials on Private
 Learning Outcomes: International Law
Students must understand Cases
 the multiple 1. Bell v Kennedy (1868) LR 1 Sc & Div. 307
2. Udny v Udny (1869) LR 1 Sc & Div. 441
definitions of
3. Mark v. Mark, 2005 UKHL, 42; (House of
Domicile
Lords, Session 2005-06).
 Be able to apply 4. In Re Flynn
domicile in the 5. Whicker v. Hume (1858) H.L.C. 124 or
Ghanaian context (1858) E.R. Vol. 11 p. 50... lord Cranworth @
 Know the different 160
types of Domicile 6. Gray v Formosa [1963] P.259@267
 Loss of Domicile 7. Acheampong v Acheampong [1967] GLR 34
8. Amponsah v Amponsah [1997-1998] 1
 Alternatives to
G.L.R. 43 at 45
Domicile (Nationality,
9. Omane v Poku [1973] 2 GLR 66
Habitual Residence, 10. Simpson v Simpson [1960] G.L.R. 105.
etc.) 11. Abu-Jaudeh v Abu-Jaudeh [1972] 2 G.L.R.
444
12. Ramsay v Liverpool Royal Infirmary [1930]
AC 588
13. In Re Fuld¹s Estate (No3) [1968] P. 675
14. IRC v Bullock [1976] 1 WLR 1178
Session 4 Jurisdiction, Staying Actions,  Richard Frimpong Oppong, “Mere Presence and
forum non conveniens etc. International Competence in Private
International Law”, Journal of Private
 When can a Ghanaian International Law, vol. 3, No. 2, 321
 A.G. Buabeng, ‘Fan Milk Ltd. v. State Shipping
court assume a case
Corporation: A Judicial Heterodoxy’, Review of
involving a foreign
Ghana Law 7 (1975): 227.
legal element (CI47)?  Cheshire & North, Private International Law
 In what (12th ed.) pp.179-180, 182-188, (13th ed.)
circumstances can pp.179-181, 285-295.
jurisdiction be Extra-  Morris & North, Cases and Materials on Private
territorial (Service International Law 57-60.
outside of the  J.H.C. Morris, Conflict of Laws (4th ed.) pp.60-63,
jurisdiction)? (5th ed.) pp.71-76.
 How do the doctrines
Cases
of Forum non
1. Moubarak v. Holland West Afrika Lijn
conveniens &
(1953) W.A.C.A. 262
Lis alibis pendens apply to 2. Polimex Co. Ltd v. BBC Builders &
conflict Engineers Co. Ltd [1968] GLR 168
3. Spiliada Maritime Corp. v. Cansulex Ltd.
[1987] 1 AC 460
4. Amin Rasheed Corp. v. Kuwait Insurance Co.

Tutorial Session 1
Session 5 Proof of Foreign Law &
Exclusion of Foreign
Law
 What is foreign law -
Fact or Law?
 What are the
mechanics of proving
foreign law?
 When can a judge
judicially notice a Cases:
foreign law?
Exclusion of Foreign 1.
Session 6
Law 2.
 What categories of 3.
Foreign Law are
4.
excluded from proof
[1984] A.C. 50
5. The Eleftheria [1970] p.94.
6. CILEV v. Chiavelli [1968] GLR 160.
7. CILEV v. Black Star Line [1967] GLR 744.
8. Fan Milk Ltd v. State Shipping
Corporation [1971] IGLR 238
9. Ackerman v. Societe Geé neé rale de
Compensation [1967] G.L.R. 212 at 214.
10. Tafa & Co. (Ghana) Ltd. v. Tafa & Co. Ltd.
[1977] 1 G.L.R. 422
11. Baroda v. Wildenstein [1972] 2 Q.B. 283
[1972] 2 All E.R. 689
12. Colt Industries Inc. v. Sarlie [1966] 1 All
E.R. 673; [1966] 1 WLR 440
1. Adrian Briggs, The Revenue Rule in the
Conflict of Laws: Time for a Makeover”
Singapore Journal of Legal Studies [2001]
280-299.
2. F.S.Tsakata, Proving Familiar Foreign Law’’
(1987-88) 16 RGL, 249-257.
3. O.Kahn-Frens, ‘’General Problems of Private
International Law [1974] III Hague Rec.139,
422-429-452.
4. Trevor C Hartley, “Pleading and Proof of
Foreign Law; The Major European Systems
Compared; (1996) 45 ICL 271.
Nelson Vs Bridport (1847) 50 E.R 207.
Brailey Vs. Rhodesia Consolidated Ltd
[1910] 2 Ch. 95.
Jadbranska Slobodna Plovida Split Vs.
Oysaltd [1979] G.L.R 129.
Lazard Bros.Vs Midland Bank [1993] A.C
289.
Parkasho Vs. Singh [1968] P.233.
Jasiewiez Vs. Jasiewiez [1962] 3 All E.R
1017.
Saxby Vs. Fulton[ 1909] 2 K.B .208
Morris, The Conflict Of Laws (4th Edition)
Ch. 3
Cheshire & North ,Private International Law
(12th Edition) Ch.7; (13th Edition) Ch.8
Morris & North, Cases And Materials On
Private International Law, Ch. 3
Mann (1988) 104 LQR 497.
 in COL Cases
 What justification is 1. Re Helbert Wagg & Co. Ltd,S Claim [1956]
Ch.323
there for these
2. Frankfurther Vs. W.L Exner Ltd.[1947]
exclusions Ch.629
3. Williama &Humbert Ltd Vs W.H Trade Marks
(Jersey) Ltd. [1986] Ac368.
4. Bank Voor Handel En Scheepvaart Nv Vs
Slatford [1953] 1 Qb 248
5. Huntington Vs. Attrill[1893] Ac 150
6. Huntington Vs Attrill[ 1892] 146 Us 657
7. Government Of India Vs. Taylor [1955] Ac
491.
8. Brokaw Vs. Seatrain Uk Ltd.[ 1971] 2 Qb 476
9. Peter Buchanan Ltd Vs. Mcvey [1955] Ac
516n
10. Attorney-General Of New Zealand Vs Ortiz
[ 1984]Ac 1
11. Re Lord Cable [ 1977] 1 Wlr7, Esp.25-26
12. United States Of America Vs Inkley [1989]
Qb 255.
13. Luther Vs Sagor [1921] 3 Kb 532.
14. Re Emery’s Investments Trusts [1959]
Ch.410

Sessio Mid Semester Exam

n7
Session 8 Recognition & 1. Cheshire & North, Private International Law
(12th Ed.) pp. 349-392, 395-405, 408-410;
Enforcement of
(13th Ed.) pp. 404-448, 450-455, 462-473.
Foreign Judgments 2. J. H. C. Morris, Conflict of Laws (4th Ed.) pp
103-125, 126, (5th Ed.) pp. 135-161, 162-
Learning Outcomes 163.
 Overview of the legal 3. Morris & North, Cases and Materials on
Private International Law, pp149-175.
regime for the
4. Adrian, Briggs “Which Foreign Judgments
enforcement of
Should We Recognise Today?” 36 ICLQ
foreign judgments
(1987).
 Procedural rules for 5. James Fawcett & Janeen M. Carruthers,
the enforcement of Cheshire, North and Fawcett Private
foreign judgments International Law (Oxford: Oxford
under common law University Press, 2008.
 Procedural rules for 6. Richard Frimpong Oppong, “Recognition
the enforcement of and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in
foreign judgments Ghana: A Second Look at a Colonial
Heritage” Commonwealth Law Bulletin, Vol.
under HC Rules
31, No. 4.
 Foreign Judgments 7. Richard Frimpong Oppong, “Canadian
excluded from Courts Enforce Foreign Non-Money
Judgments”, (2007) 70 (4) MLR 654-679.
enforcement/justifica
8. Richard Frimpong Oppong, “Enforcing
tion for the rule
Foreign Non-Money Judgments: An
Examination of Some Recent Developments
in Canada” U.B.C. LAW REVIEW Vol. 39:2
September, 2006 257.
9. Richard Frimpong Oppong, “Private
International Law and the African Economic
Community: A Plea for Greater Attention”,
ICLQ vol. 55, October 2006, 911-928.
10. Adrian Briggs, “Crossing the River by
Feeling the Stones: Rethinking the Law on
Foreign Judgments”, (2004) 8 SYBIL
(Singapore Year Book of International Law
and Contributors), 1-22.
Cases
1. Adams v. Cape Industries Plc [1990] Ch.
433, esp. 513A-531F, 535B-537C, 541F-
542A, 543D-544H, 546C-D, 548G-549B,
549D-550B, 550F-557G, 557H-572D
2. John Holt & Co. Ltd v. Christoph Nutsugah
[1929-31] Div. Ct. 75
3. Re Dulles (No. 2) [1951] CH 842.
4. Ashurst Morris Crisp v. Renner (1931-37)
Div. Ct. 107
5. Henry v. Geoprosco International Ltd.
[1976] 2 QB 726
6. Schibsby v. Westenholz (1870) LR 6 QB 155
7. Copin v. Adamson (1874) LR 9 Ex. 345;
(1875)1 Ex. D. 17
8. Emmanuel v. Symon [1908] 1 KB 302
9. Blohn v. Desser [1962] 2 QB 116
10. Buchanan v. Rucker (1808) 103 ER 546
11. Nouvioun v. Freeman [1889] 15 App Cas 1
12. Colt Industries Inc. v. Sarlie (No. 2) [1966]
1 WLR 1287
13. Godard v. Gray (1870) LR 6 QB 139
14. Raulin v. Fischer [1911] 2 KB 93
15. USA v. Inkley [1989] QB 28
16. Bridgway v. Citibank (U.S. 2nd Circuit Court
of Appeals, Judgment delivered on 3
January 2000 (on file in Law Library)
17. Pro Swing Inc. v. Elta Golf Inc., 2006 SCC
 (SUPREME COURT OF CANADA) 52 DATE:
2006/11/17; DOCKET: 30529; CORAM:
McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, LeBel,
Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ.
18. Vervaeke v. Smith [1983] 1 AC 145
19. Yankson v. Mensah [1976] 1 GLR 355
20. Perry v. Zissis [1977] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 607

Tutorial Session 2
Sessio The Recognition &
n9 Enforcement of
Foreign Arbitral
Awards
◦ The statutory regime
for the enforcement
of Foreign Arbitration Cases:
Awards
◦ Enforcement via
common law
◦ UNCITRAL
Arbitration Rules
1. S.A. Tiewul & S. Tsegah, “Arbitration and the
Settlement of Commercial Disputes” (1975)
24 ICLQ 393
2. S.A. Tiewul, ‘The Enforcement of Arbitration
Agreements and Awards’, UGLJ 11 (1974),
143
3. Morris & North, Cases and Materials on
Private International Law, pp. 206-210
1. Paul Gyasi v. Abosso Goldfields Ltd,
Unreported 30th July 2004 High Court
Accra, Justice Baffoe Bonnie presiding
2. Whitworth Street Estates Ltd v. James Miller
and Partners Ltd. [1970] AC 583
3. Union Nationale des Cooperatives Agricoles
de Cereales v. Robert Catterall and Co. Ltd.
[1959] 2 QB 44
4. Dalmia Dairy Industries Ltd. v. National
Bank of Pakistan [1978] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 223
5. de Graft Johnson v. Ghana Commercial Bank
[1973] 2 GLR 100
6. Suka v. Glavee [1991] 1 GLR 194, esp. 196-
204
7. Strojexport v. Edward Nassar & Co. [1965]
GLR 591
8. Jadbranska Slobodna Plovidba v Oysa Ltd,
1978 (2) A.L.R. Comm. 108

Sessio Torts in the Conflict of 1. Cheshire & North’s Private International

Law (13th Ed.) pp. 605, 614, 657-660, 664-
n 10 Law II
669.
Sessio Torts in the Conflict of 2. J.H.C. Morris, The Conflict of Laws (5th Ed.),
n 11 Law II pp. 353-366.
3. Morris & North’s Cases and Materials on
Private International Law, pp. 467-505.
  Lex For a Rule
 Lex Loci Delecti
 The Proper Law of
CASES
Tort
 The Rule in Phillips v
Eyre compared to
Proper Law of Tort
 Phillips v Eyre v
Reforming the Double
Actionabilty Rule
Week 12 Final Tutorial Session
4. Adrian Briggs, The Conflict of Laws, pp.
174-183.
1. Phillips v. Eyre (1870) LR 6 OB 1.
2. Scott v. Seymour (1862) 1 H&C 219; 32 LJ
Ex 61.
3. Chaplin v. Boys [1971] AC 356.
4. The Harlley (1868) LR 2 PC 193.
5. The Mary Moxham (1876) 1 PD 107; 46 LJP
17.
6. Machado v. Fontes 2 (1897) 2 QB 231; 66
LJQB 542.
7. Koop v. Bebb (1951) 84 CLR 629 [1952]
ALR 37.
8. Slater v. Mexican National Railway Co.
(1904) 194 US 120.
9. Babcock v. Jackson (193) 12 N.Y. 2d 473;
191 NE 2d 279 (New York Court of
Appeals).
10. Sayer v. International Drilloing Co. NV
[1971] 3 All ER 163; [1971] WLR 1176
(CA).
11. Couplan v. Arabian Oil Co. [1983] 1 WLR
1136; [1983] 3 All ER226 (CA).
12. Tooker v. Lopez 24 N.Y. 2d 569, 585 N.E. 2d
454, 457-458 (1970).
13. Red Sea Insurance Co Ltd v. Bouygues
[1995] 1 Ac 190.
14. Metal und Rohstoff v. Donaldson [1990] 1
QB 391.
15. Pearce v. Ove Arup [1999] 1 All ER 769.
16. George MOnro Ltd v. American Cynamaid
{1944} KB 432.
17. Distillers Co. Ltd v. Thompson [1971] AC
458.
18. Cordova Land Co. Ltd v. Victor [1966] 1
WLR 793.
19. Signal Oil & Gas Co. v. Bristow Helicopters
[1976] 1 GLR 371.